Skip to main content

Full text of "Annals of the "low-church" party in England, down to the death of Archbishop Tait"

See other formats


MSjfflBffil  W  •*#    iB 










<^^5V  OF  Plij^: 


^  MAY    5    1932  ^ 
A.  N  N  A  L  8       <k  I'  .v^. 




BY     THE   /\/^ 

REV.  V/;.    H.    B.    PROBY,    M.A., 

THE    GOSPEL    ACCORDING    TO    ST.    JOHN,"    ETC. 


n6\\''  RTTio-Tia  5eBpaK€v  ayaQa  [/col]  Triaris  KaKa. 

Clem.  Alex.,  Sirom.  IV.  iii.,  init. 


J.    T.    HAYES, 







Chapter  XXXVIII.— Polemical  Period,  continued.  The  Gorham 

Chapter  XXXIX.— Polemical  Period,  continued.  Papal  Aggres- 
sion. "  Durham  Letter."  Dr.  M'Neile  on  Confession  and 
Absolution.  Eevival  of  Convocation.  Exeter  Synod.  Epis- 
copal Pastoral  on  Ritual.  Division  of  Services.  Evening 
Communion.     Rev.  W.  J.  E.  Bennett,  Yicar  of  Frome. 

Chapter  XL.— Polemical  Period,  continued.  Miss  Sellon  and 
her  Sisterhood  attacked  by  the  Piev.  J.  Spm-rell.  Prayer-book 
Pievision  Society.  Low-Church  Plot  for  Religious  Comprehen- 
sion in  Australia. 


Chapter  XLI. — Polemical  Period,  continued.  Low-Church  Oppo- 
sition to  the  Sacramental  System.  Suit  brought  by  Westerton. 
Sabbatarianism.  Rev.  H.  Alford  and  the  Eecord.  Bishop 
Gobat  and  Schismatics  in  Scotland.  Rev.  Henry  Cotterill 
appointed  to  the  See  of  Grahamstown.  Opening  of  St.  Aidan's 
College,  Birkenhead. 

Chapter  XLII. — Prosecution  of  Archdeacon  Denison.  New 
Society  for  maintaining  Low-Church  Principles.  Riotous  Con- 
duct at  a  Sister's  Fmieral.  Privy  Council  Judgment  about  the 
Knightsbridge  Churches. 

Chapter  XLIIL— Polemical  Period,  continued.  Movement  for 
extra  Preaching.  Opening  of  Exeter  Hall  on  Sunday  Evenings. 
Opening  of  St.  Paul's  and  Westmmster  Abbey  for  Evening  Ser- 
vices and  Sermons.  Special  Services  Aid  Society.  "Church 
Missionary  Society"  helps  to  increase  the  Episcopate.  Fra- 
ternising with  Dissent.  Dean  Alford  and  the  "  Evangehcal 
Alhance  "  at  Berlin.     Tiu-kish  Missions  Aid  Society. 


Chapter  XLIV.— Polemical  Period,  continiTecL  Eev.  A.  Poole 
turned  out  of  his  Curacy  for  hearing  Confessions,  &c.  Com- 
plaints af^ainst  the  Eev.  E.  T.  West.  Disregard  of  Truth. 
Promotions  of  Low-Churchmen  by  Lord  Palmerston. 

Chapter  XLV.— Polemical  Period,  continued.  Emotional  "  Ee- 
vival."  Lavington  Case.  Cuddesdon  College.  Agitation  in 
the  Oxford  Diocese. 

Chapter  XLVI. — Polemical  Period,  continued.  Low-Clrarch  Dis- 
honesty in  regard  of  the  Prayer-book.  Agitation  for  Eevision. 
Prayer-book  Eevision  Society. 

Chapter  XLVII. — Polemical  Period,  continued.  Eiots  at  St. 

Chapter  XLVIII. — Polemical  Period,  continued.  Eise  of  the 
Broad-Church  Party.  Its  Characteristics.  Line  taken  byLow- 
Chm-chmen  against  it.  Proceedings  against  Prof.  Jowett. 
Attempt  against  Mr.  Maurice's  Institution. 

Chapter  XLIX. — Polemical  Period,  continued.  Publication  of 
Essays  and  Eevieivs.  Tendency  of  that  Work.  Proceedings 
against  Dr.  Williams  and  Mr.  Wilson. 

Chapter  L. — Polemical  Period,  continued.  Bishop  Colenso  of 
Natal.  His  heretical  Publications.  Proceedings  with  regard 
to  him.     Line  taken  by  the  Low-Church  Party. 

Chapter  LI. — Polemical  Period,  continued.  Opposition  at  Oxford 
to  Woodard  Schools.  Eev.  J.  W.  Cunningham.  Opposition 
to  a  Scheme  for  Missionary  Bishops.  Low-Churchmen  hissed 
at  a  Church-Congress.  London  College  of  Divinity.  Eev. 
Dr.  Marsh.     Eev.  H.  V.  Elhott.     Eev.  Hugh  Stowell. 

Chapter  LIL— Polemical  Period,  continued.  Improvements  in 
Chm-ch  IMatters  discussed  or  recommended  by  Low-Churchmen. 
Some  Improvements  deprecated.    Abuses  allowed. 

Chapter  LIIL— The  Immoral  Period.  Decline  of  the  Low-Church 
Party  in  Spurituality,  Moral  Tone,  and  Intellectual  Power. 


Chapter  LIV. — Immoral  Period,  contimiecl.  Failure  of  the  Low- 
Church  Party  in  controversy  with  Tractarianism.  Employment 
by  Low-Chm-chmen  of  Force  and  Compulsion.  Occasion  hereof 
— the  Eise  of  Ritualism.  Unreasoning  Character  (and  yet 
Reasonableness)  of  Low-Church  Opposition. 

Chapter  LV. — Immoral  Period,  continued.  The  Persecution 
becomes  systematic.  Formation  of  the  "  Chvu'ch  Association." 
Distinct  from  the  Prayer-book  Revision  Societj'.  Manner  of 
working.  Liverpool  Memorials  against  Ritualism.  Agitation 
in  the  Salisbiiry  Diocese.  Clerical  Vestments  Bill,  Guarantee 
Fund  of  the  "  Church  Association."  Counter-declaration  to  a 
Catholic  Memorial,  Archdeacon  Jacob's  Memorial,  Rev,  J, 
Ormiston  at  St,  Alban's,  Holborn,  Archbishop  Longley  and 
Mr,  Weld,     Disturbances  in  Stoke  Newington. 

Chapter  LVI, — Immoral  Period,  contimxed.  Commencement  ox 
systematic  Persecution  in  the  case  of  the  Rev.  A,  H,  Mackonochie: 
approved  by  the  Low-Church  Party  generally.  Visitation- 
charge  of  Bishox?  Hamilton  of  Salisbury ;  consequent  Opposition: 
Meetings  and  Petitions,  Ritual  Commission,  Low-Church 
Dishonesty,  Pan-Aiiglican  Conference.  Low-Church  Pro- 
motions. Further  Proceedings  against  Mr.  Mackonochie.  Paid 

Chapter  LVII, — Immoral  Period,  continued.  Commencement 
of  the  BocJi.  Proprietary^  Chapels.  Persecution  of  the  Rev. 
John  Purchas, 

Chapter  LVIII, — Immoral  Period,  contmued.  Prosecutions  of 
the  Rev.  Hooker  Wix  and  the  Rev,  W.  J.  E.  Bennett,  Lord 
Shaftesbmy's  Ecclesiastical  Courts  Reform  Bill,  Opposition  to 
communicating  in  the  Pahn.  Low-Clnu'ch  Refusals  to  associate 
with  Ritualists, 

Chapter  LIX. — Immoral  Period,  continued.  Agitation  against 
the  Athanasian  Creed.  Consecration  of  St.  Peter's,  Clerkenwell. 
Bill  for  admitting  Dissenters  to  Anglican  Pulpits.  Decease  of 
the  Rev.  Henry  Venn  (the  younger).  Biographical  Notice  of 
him.  Opposition  to  the  Confraternity  of  the  Blessed  Sacrament. 
Decoration  of  St.  Paul's. 

Chapter  LX, — Immoral  Period,  continued.  Persecution  of  the 
Rev,  John  Edwards.  Pubhc  Worship  Regulation  Act.  Lord 
Penzance,  Commencement  of  Mr.  Edwards's  Prosecution,  New 
Suit  against  Mr.  Mackonochie, 


Chapter  LXI. — Immoral  Period,  continued.  Memorial  against 
the  Eev.  C.  E.  Hodson.  Cliristian  Observer.  Memorial  against 
Vestments  and  Eastward  Position.  Case  of  the  Eev.  Flavel 
Cook.  Public  Worship  Eegulation  Act.  Line  taken  by  Low- 
Chm'chmen.      Prosecution  of  the  Eev.  C.  J.  Eidsdale.     Eesults. 

Chapter  LXII. — Immoral  Period,  continiied.  Eefusal  of  certain 
Bishops  to  license  Curates  for  High-Churchmen.  Persecution 
of  the  Eev.  A.  Tooth.  Eiotous  and  profane  Conduct  of  Pro- 
testants at  St.  James's,  Hatcham. 

Chapter  LXIII. — Immoral  Period,  continued.  Various  minor 
Prosecutions  and  Attempts.  The  Priest  in  Absolution  :  Society 
of  the  Holy  Cross.  Agitation  against  both.  Its  hypocritical 
Character.     Anti-Confessional  Memorial. 

Chapter  LXIV. — Immoral  Period,  continued.  Low-Church  Con- 
duct at  the  Croydon  Church-Congress.  Low-Church  Secessions. 
Conference  of  High-Churchmen  and  Low-Churchmen  at  Lam- 
beth. Low-Church  Withdrawals  from  the  S.P.C.K.  Pro- 
ceedings against  Mr.  Edwards.  Profane  Mob  in  his  Church. 
Bishop  Jackson  and  the  Holy  Cross  Society.  Fm-ther  Pro- 
ceedings against  Mr.  Mackonochie.  Lord  Penzance  and  Sir 
Alexander  Cockburn.  Memorial  against  Cuddesdon  College. 
Third  Suit  agamst  Mr.  Mackonochie.  Wycliffe  and  Eidley 

Chapter  LXV. — Immoral  Period,  continued.  St.  Peter's,  London 
Docks.  Attempts  of  the  "  Church  Association  "  to  molest  the 
Clergy  there.     Failure.     Subsequent  Conduct  of  the  Association. 

Chapter  LXVI. — Immoral  Period,  continued.  Various  Prosecu- 
tions and  Attempts.  Conduct  of  the  Eev.  E.  0.  T.  Thorpe. 
More  Attempts  at  Persecution.  Low-Church  Conduct  at  the 
Sheffield  Church  Congress.  Prosecution  of  the  Eev.  P.  Ahier 
for  speaking  ill  of  the  Bad-. 

Chapter  LXVIL— Immoral  Period,  continued.  Prosecution  of 
Canon  Carter.  Bishop  Ellicott  and  Mr.  Ward  of  St.  Eaphael's, 
Bristol.     Persecution  of  the  Eev.  T.  Pelham  Dale. 

Chapter  LXVIIL— Immoral  Period,  continued.  Persecution  of 
the  Eev.  S.  F.  Green.  Prayer-book  Eevision  Society  and  Bill. 
The  Deans'  Memorial  in  favour  of  Toleration.  Counter- 
Memorials.  Bills  for  amending  the  Clergy  DiscipHne  Act  and 
I'ublic  Worship  Eegulation  Act.     Eelease  of  Mr.  Green. 


Chapter  LXIX. — Immoral  Period,  contimied.  Contimied  Perse- 
cution of  Mr,  Edwards  (Baghot  de  la  Bere)  and  Mr.  Dale. 

Chapter  LXX. — Immoral  Period,  continued.  Low-Chnreh  Pro- 
motions. Fraternising  with  Dissent.  Low-Clnirch  Decline. 
"  Neo-Evangelicals."  Dictation  by  the  "  Church  Pastoral  Aid 
Society."  Rev.  Pi.  W.  Eandall  refused  the  Pulpit  of  Bristol 

Chapter  LXXI. — Immoral  Period,  continued.  Persecution  of  the 
Rev.  R.  Enraght. 

Chapter  LXXII. — Immoral  Period,  continued.  The  "  Church 
Association "  at  a  stand-still.  Further  Intolerance.  Ruffian- 
ism at  West  Worlington.  Riotous  Proceedings  at  St.  Jude's, 
Liverpool.  Attack  on  the  Rev.  N.  Y.  Birkmyre.  Bishop  Piers 
Claughton  joins  the  "Church  Association."  A  Word  for  the 
Ritualists  from  Bishop  Oxenden.  Attacks  on  the  Rev.  G.  C. 

Chapter  LXXIII. — Immoral  Period,  continued.  Decease  of 
Archbishop  Tait.  End  of  the  Mackonochie  Case.  The  "  Church 
Association"  and  Bishop  Jackson. 

Chapter  LXXIV. — General  State  of  the  Low- Church  Party.  The 
"  Chm-ch  Association  "  discredited.  Bad  Traits.  Bad  Account 
given  in  Christian  Observer.  Mmisterial  Inefficiency.  Pro- 
ceedings in  Low-Church  Places  of  Worship.  Private  Offices. 
Missionary  Zeal.  Workers.  Ignorance  in  the  Clergy.  Hymnals  : 
Kemble's,  Mercer's.  False  Doctrine.  Low-Church  Interpre- 
tations of  Rubrics.  Persons  preferred  to  Principles.  Losses 
from  Low-Church  Ranks. 

Chapter  LXXV  — What  the  Low- Church  Party  might  have  done. 
Bad  Blood  Effect  of  the  Persecution  on  the  Persecutors. 
Results  of  ow-Chiu-ch  Policy  on  the  Moral  State  of  the  Nation. 
Special  National  Sins.  Disestablishment  of  the  Chiu'ch.  Les- 
sons suggested  by  these  Annals.  Future  of  the  Low- Church 
Party.     Duties  of  the  Church, 




[By  some  misadventure  a  paragraph  has  been  lost  which 
should  have  appeared  in  vol.  i.  page  442,  after  that  paragraph 
which  treats  of  the  "Church  Pastoral  Aid  Society."  Tlie 
omission  was  not  found  out  till  after  the  issue  of  that  volume. 
It  is  here  supplied,  in  the  hope  that  the  reader  will  not  have 
been  inconvenienced.  The  note  on  page  442  belongs  properly 
to  the  sentence  ending  with  the  word  "  Anabaptists  "  on  page 
447  of  the  same  volume,  line  4  from  bottom.] 

About  the  same  time  (1835)  was.  formed  "  the 
Colonial  Church  Society,"  afterwards  amalgamated 
with  the  "  Newfoundland  School  Society,"  so  as  to 
form  what  is  now  called  "  The  Colonial  and  Con- 
tinental Church  Society."  The  theory  of  the  ori- 
ginal Society,  in  its  constitution  and  principles, 
was,  so  far  as  we  have  been  able  to  make  out,  such 
as  to  commend  itself  to  the  cordial  attachment  of 
Low-Churchmen  calling  themselves  Protestant  and 
Evangelical.  No  archbishop  or  bishop  of  the 
Church  had,  in  his  official  capacity,  anything 
whatever  to  do  with  it.  It  was  a  thoroughly  party 
Society  ;  as  is  that  Society  now  existing  of  which 
it  became  a  component  part,  and  the  work  whereof 
has,  we  believe,  been  uniformly  answerable  to  its 






Polemical  Period,  continued.     The  Gorham  Case. 

"  Woe  unto  them  that  call  evil  good,  and  good  evil ;  that  put 
darkness  for  light,  and  Hght  for  darkness ;  that  put  bitter  for  sweet, 
and  sweet  for  bitter." — Isaiah  v.  20. 

The  year  1850  was  remarkable  for  two  events 
having  important  bearings  upon  the  Low-Church 
party,  and  indeed  upon  the  Church  of  England  in 
general.  Those  two  events  were  the  conclusion 
of  the  celebrated  "  Gorham  case,"  and  the  Papal 

From  the  very  beginning  of  the  Low-Church 
movement,  Low-Church  people  had  been  heterodox 
on  the  subject  of  Sacraments  generally.  And,  to 
speak  more  particularly  of  Baptism,  we  have  seen 
how  unsound  on  this  subject  were  the  views  enter- 
tained by  all  the  principal  Low-Church  leaders. 
The  Tracts  for  the  Times  had  called  forth  this  un- 
soundness into  positive  distinctness ;  and,  what 
with  this  and  what  with  the  large  spread  of 
n-  2 

2  REV.   G.    C.    GORHAM   EXAMINED. 

Tractarian  doctrines,  matters  had  become  ripe  for 
a  pitched  battle  between  the  two  parties.  Under 
these  circumstances,  the  Eev.  George  Cornehus 
Gorham,  Vicar  of  St.  Just,  Cornwall,  had  arranged 
for  exchanging  his  living  for  that  of  Brampford- 
Speke-cum-Gowley,  near  Exeter,  and  on  the  8th 
of  November,  1847,  applied  to  the  Bishop  of  Exeter 
(Dr.  Philpotts)  for  institution  to  the  latter  benefice. 
The  Bishop,  in  reply,  declined  instituting  Mr. 
Gorham  until  he  should  have  examined  his  doctrinal 
views  and  found  them  orthodox ;  and  kept  him 
waiting  until  the  17th  of  December,  when  he  put 
four  questions  to  him  in  writing ;  and  continued 
questioning  him  on  that  and  the  four  following 
days  (Sunday  excepted),  and  on  an  average  of  more 
than  seven  hours  each  day ;  and  this  while  Mr. 
Gorham  was  certified  by  his  medical  attendant  to 
be  too  weak  for  ministerial  duties.  At  last  the 
examination  was  suspended,  Mr.  Gorham  deeming 
it  necessary  to  go  to  London  for  advice.  On  the 
10th  of  February,  1848,  he  renewed  his  application 
for  institution.  The  Bishop,  however,  required 
Mr.  Gorham  to  submit  to  more  examination.  To 
this,  under  protest,  Mr.  Gorham  acceded  ;  and  the 
examination  was  renewed  on  the  8tli  of  March,  and 
continued  on  the  two  following  days ;  fourteen 
hours  being  thus  occupied.  On  the  21st  of  March 
the  Bishop  intimated  his  refusal  to  institute,  on  the 
ground  of  unsoundness  in  doctrine. 

What  object  the  Bishop  had  in  prolonfring  the 
proceedings  does  not  appear.  The  question  of 
Mr.  Gorham's  soundness  as  to  the  doctrine  of  Holy 
Baptism  might  probably  have  been  settled  in  a  few 

THE    GORHAM    CASE.  3 

minutes,  Mr.  Gorham  having  distinctly  avowed  on 
the  very  first  day  of  his  examination  the  foUow- 
inof  as  his  view  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments 
as  held  by  the  Church  of  England  and  by  himself : 
viz.  that  "  where  there  is  no  worthy  reception, 
there  is  no  bestowment  of  grace."  *  Wlien  asked 
whether  every  validly  baptized  infant  is  made  in 
baptism  "  a  member  of  Christ,  the  child  of  God, 
and  an  inheritor  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  and  is 
"  by  the  laver  of  regeneration  in  baptism  received 
into  the  number  of  children  of  God  and  heirs  of 
everlasting  life,"  *  and  "  born  anew  of  water  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  f  his  answer  had  in  effect  been, 
Not  absolutely,  but  only  conditionally  on  repent- 
ance and  faith :  and  the  grace  to  repent  and 
believe  must  have  been  given  by  God  before  the 
person  could  have  received  baptism  rightly.  All 
baptized  infants  who  die  before  they  commit  actual 
sin  have  had  this  prevenient  grace. 

The  Bishop  having  refused  institution,  Mr.  Gor- 
ham appealed  to  the  Court  of  Arches  ;  and  Sir 
Herbert  Jenner  Fust,  then  Dean  of  Arches,  de- 
cided against  him  on  the  2nd  of  August,  1849.  In 
this  judgment  the  ground  of  the  Prayer-book  was 
taken  up,  and  the  Articles  and  the  opinions  of  the 
reformers  treated  as  only  secondary  to  it. 

We  may  pause  for  a  few  moments  to  remark.  If 
Mr.  Gorham's  doctrine  had  been  true,  and  allow- 
able in  the  lips  of  a  minister  of  the  Church,  what 
words  could  have  been  too  strong  for  denouncing 
the  policy  of  a  Church  which,  while  admitting  that 

*  Office  for  Private  Baptism  of  Infants, 
t  Office  for  Public  Baptism  of  Infants. 



doctrine,  should  declare  nevertheless  over  every 
person  baptized  at  his  font  that  he  is  regenerate, 
and  thereupon  call  upon  the  congregation  to  give 
thanks  to  God  accordingly  ! — of  a  Church  which 
should  teach  all  her  baptized  little  ones  without 
exception,  as  they  grew  up,  to  speak  of  their 
baptism  as  that  wherein  they  were  made  members 
of  Christ,  children  of  God,  and  inheritors  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven ! 

Not  one  straw,  however,  did  the  Low-Church 
party  care  for  the  credit  herein  of  the  Church  of 
England,  though  professing  themselves  her  faithful 
members.  It  was  not,  in  their  opinion,  their  busi- 
ness to  choose  between  the  alternative  of  teachinc^ 
according  to  the  Prayer-book,  on  the  one  hand, 
and,  on  the  other,  that  of  ceasing  to  hold  their 
charges  in  the  Church.  Eather,  it  was  their  busi- 
ness to  teach  according  to  their  own  private  views, 
and  the  business  of  the  Church's  rulers  to  turn 
them  out  if  they  could.  And  therefore,  when  Sir 
Herbert  Jenner  Fust's  judgment  came  out,  uphold- 
ing the  Bishop  of  Exeter,  and  condemning  Mr. 
Gorham,  Mr.  Gorham  appealed  to  the  Queen  in 
Council,  and  had,  in  so  doing,  the  sympathy  of  all 
his  Low-Church  brethren. 

The  Court  of  Appeal  before  which  the  case  was 
thus  brought  owed  its  constitution  in  such  cases 
to  an  oversight  which  had  been  made  in  the  draft 
of  an  Act  of  Parliament  passed  some  time  before. 
By  that  Act  (3  and  4  Gul.  IV.  c.  41)  certain  ex- 
qfficio  members  were  appointed,  and  power  was 
given  to  the  Crown  to  appoint  two  other  members, 
being  Privy  Councillors ;  and,  further,  to  summon 


any  other  members  of  the  Privy  Council  to  attend 
the  meetings  of  the  Judicial  Committee.  Thus  it 
came  to  pass  that  for  hearing  Mr.  Gorham's  appeal 
there  sat,  on  the  11th  of  December,  1849,  Lord 
Langdale,  Master  of  the  EoUs ;  Lord  Campbell,  Lord 
Chief  Justice  ;  Mr.  Baron  Parke  ;  Vice-Chancellor 
Sir  J.  Knight  Bruce ;  the  Eight  Hon.  Dr.  Lushing- 
ton,  and  the  Eight  Hon.  Pemberton  Leigh,  To 
sit  with  them  as  assessors  there  were  the  two  Arch- 
bishops (Dr.  Sumner  and  Dr.  Musgrave),  and  the 
Bishop  of  London  (Dr.  Blomfield).  And  judgment 
was  delivered  on  the  8th  of  March,  1850.  In  it  their 
Lordships  never  brought  Mr.  Gorham's  real  opinions 
to  the  test  of  the  Church's  formularies,  but  pro- 
pounded a  view  of  their  own,  and  attributed  that 
to  Mr,  Gorham  instead  of  what  he  really  held. 
Their  view  was  that  the  grace  of  regeneration  does 
not  so  necessarily  accompany  the  act  of  baptism 
that  regeneration  invariably  takes  place  in  baptism, 
but  that  the  grace  may  be  granted  before  or  after 
baptism  as  well  as  in  it.  And  this  view  they  de- 
clared it  lawful  for  a  clergyman  to  hold  and  teach ; 
and  on  the  ground  hereof  they  reversed  the  decision 
of  the  Dean  of  Arches,  and  ordered  the  Bishop  of 
Exeter  to  institute  Mr.  Gorham  to  the  living  of 
Brampford-Speke.  It  is  to  be  observed,  however, 
that  Sir  J.  Knight  Bruce  dissented,  and  so  did 
another  Judge  ;  also,  that  the  untruthfulness  of 
attributing  to  Mr.  Gorham  the  views  which  their 
Lordships  did  attribute  to  him  was  pointed  out  by 
the  Bishop  of  London ;  but  this  occasioned  no 
alteration  of  the  judgment. 

The  Eev.  Henry  Venn,  grandson  of  the  author 


of  the  Complete  Duty  of  Man,  was  present  in  the 
Council  Chamber  when  the  judgment  was  dehvered, 
and  wrote  in  his  private  diary  a  graphic  account 
of  the  proceedings.  "At  1.30,  Pettitt,  John,  and 
I  went  to  Council  Chamber  ;  the  doors  were  not 
opened;  a  great  crowd  in  the  streets.  While 
waiting,  Sir  E.  Price  drove  up,  and  I  took  advan- 
tao"e  of  his  entree ;  a  friend  of  his  took  us  up  into 
the  library.  .  .  .  Wlien  the  doors  were  opened 
we  made  a  rush,  and  reached  the  left-hand  corner. 
...  At  length,  the  space  beyond  us  being  filled, 
the  press  partially  subsided.  The  judgment  then 
commenced  ;  it  was  long  before  I  could  realise  the 
solemnity  of  the  scene,  after  the  pressure  and  con- 
fusion that  we  had  endured.  Lord  Langdale  read 
the  judgment  with  great  clearness  and  emphasis. 
.  .  .  Pound  the  Council-table  sat  Lords  Brougham, 
Campbell,  and  others  ;  in  the  next  circle  of  chairs 
were  Lord  Carlisle  and  many  others  ;  the  avenues 
on  each  side  of  the  room  were  crowded  ;  in  front 
of  the  Council-table  were  lawyers  and  a  few  select 
persons ;  and  then  the  dense  mass  of  the  public 
wedged  into  every  inch  of  space  allotted  to 
strangers.  The  various  emotions  depicted  upon 
the  countenances  reminded  me  of  Paffaelle's  car- 
toon of  '  Paul  Preaching  at  Athens.'  My  own  mind 
was  in  a  kind  of  trance  at  hearinef  such  sound  and 
Protestant  sentiments  propounded  by  the  highest 
judicial  authority  of  the  kingdom.  The  judgment 
was  a  more  decided  and  complete  vindication  of  the 
liberty  of  our  Church  than  I  had  dared  to  hope  for. 
...  At  the  conclusion  the  shouts,  evidently  in- 
voluntary, ejaculations  of  '  Bravo ! '  from  many  a 


beaming  countenance,  the  start  which  it  occasioned 
to  the  Lords  of  the  Council,  and  the  eager  '  Hush  ! ' 
of  the  officers,  gave  a  somewhat  ludicrous  turn. 
The  court  was  then  cleared.  In  the  porch  at  the 
bottom  of  the  stairs  many  of  us  assembled  to  con- 
gratulate each  other  upon  the  result."  And  well 
they  might ;  for  a  judgment  which  should  have 
upheld  the  obvious  sense  of  the  Prayer-book  as 
limiting  the  wider  and  laxer  interpretation  of  the 
Articles  would  have  made  their  positions  in  the 
ministry  of  the  Church  of  England  untenable  legally 
as  well  as  morally. 

In  pursuance  of  the  decree  of  the  Queen  in 
Council,  Mr.  Gorham  was  instituted  to  his  benefice, 
by  (we  believe)  the  Dean  of  Arches  ;  and,  having 
taken  possession,  he  lost  no  time  in  repudiating  the 
doctrine  which  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy 
Council  had  attributed  to  him.  He  remained  in 
possession  of  his  benefice  until  his  decease,  which 
took  place  in  1857.  The  Bishop  of  Exeter  wrote 
and  published  a  letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, in  which  he  declared  his  refusal  to  hold 
connnunion  with  anyone,  be  he  who  he  might, 
holding  Mr.  Gorham's  opinions  ;  which  letter  was 
criticised  by  the  Eev.  William  Goode,  afterwards 
Dean  of  Eipon,  in  a  letter  to  the  Bishop.  The 
Bishop  held  a  Diocesan  Synod  on  the  25tli  of  June, 
1850,  with  a  view  to  putting  forth  a  declaration 
on  the  subject  of  Holy  Baptism.  After  Divine 
Service  and  a  celebration  of  the  Eucharist  in  the 
Cathedral,  about  300  clergy  of  the  diocese  went  in 
procession  to  the  Chapter-house.  A  declaration 
was  presented  by  the  Bishop  affirming  the  doctrine 


of  unconditional  regeneration  in  baptism,  and  this 
declaration  was  in  part  accepted  by  the  Synod.  We 
say  in  part,  for  it  was  so  modified  as  to  affirm  un- 
conditional regeneration  in  the  case  of  infants,  but 
to  deny  it  in  the  case  of  adults  !  thus  making  out, 
as  was  remarked  afterwards  by  a  layman,  two 
baptisms  instead  of  one.  And  in  this  modified, 
unsound  form  it  was  accepted  by  the  Synod  ;  which 
thus,  as  Archdeacon  Denison  2:)ointed  out,  con- 
founded between  the  gift  conveyed  in  a  sacrament 
and  the  blessing  received.*  As  to  the  conduct  of 
Low-Church  clergymen  of  the  diocese  with  respect 
to  the  Exeter  Synod  we  shall  have  somewhat  to 
say  by-and-by. 

The  holding  of  this  Synod  was,  we  believe,  the 
last  great  step  taken  by  the  Bishop  of  Exeter  for 
securing  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  on  the  subject 
of  Baptism.  Indeed,  so  far  as  we  have  been  able 
to  learn,  he  never  afterwards  attempted  to  avoid 
instituting  a  clergyman  on  the  ground  of  heresy 
concerning  any  part  of  the  Catholic  faith — at  least, 
concerning  those  parts  of  it  which  Low-Church 
people  generally  denied  or  questioned.  And  the 
Low-Church  party  all  over  the  kingdom  were  con- 
firmed in  their  position  within  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land.f  And  when  a  Low-Church  clergyman,  imme- 
diately after  baptizing  a  child  in  church,  proceeded 

*  The  Declaration  as  proposed  by  the  Bishop  will  be  found  in 
Notes  of  my  Life,  by  Archdeacon  Denison,  p.  205,  &c. 

t  Bishop  Sumner  of  Winchester  wrote  thus :— "  I  have  never 
yet  met  with  anyone  who  has  '  taken  up  Gorham,'  in  the  sense  of 
assenting  to  his  doctrine ;  and  certainly  I,  for  one,  disdain  all  sym- 
pathy with  it,  though  not  all  sympathy  with  him,  as  beUeving  him 
to  be  within  the  pale  of  the  Church's  tolerance."— it/e,  p.  337. 


to  say,  "  Seeing  now,  dearly  beloved  brethren,  that 
this  child  is  regenerate,  and  grafted  into  the  body 
of  Christ's  Church,"  and  then  to  interpolate  these 
words — ''not  one  word  of  which  do  I  believe^'  no 
one,  so  far  as  the  writer  was  informed,  ever  at- 
tempted to  bring  him  up  for  ecclesiastical  censure. 
The  fact  was,  that  a  triumph  had  been  achieved 
for  the  whole  Low-Church  party  everywhere.  The 
Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council  had  ruled  that 
the  statements  of  the  Prayer-book  needed  not  to 
be  taken  in  their  natural  and  grammatical  sense, 
and  had  thus  opened  the  door  not  only  to  the 
particular  heresy  held  by  Mr.  Gorham,  though 
ignoring,  as  we  have  seen,  that  heresy  in  detail, 
but  also  to  Zuingiian  heresy  as  well.  Por  their 
Lordships  had  treated  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  as 
having  practically  a  superior  authority  to  the 
Prayer-book.  With  regard  to  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles,  the  subscriptions  of  the  clergy  did  not 
■commit  them  to  the  acknowledgment  of  more  than 
that  the  Articles  were  agreeable  to  the  word  of 
God  ;  while,  with  regard  to  the  Prayer-book,  every 
beneficed  clergyman  had  declared  his  unfeigned 
assent  and  consent  to  all  and  everything  contained 
•and  prescribed  in  and  by  it.  Again,  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles  were  binding  on  the  clergy  only  ;  the 
laity  were  not  committed  to  them  in  any  degree 
whatever.  The  expressions  of  the  Prayer-book,  on 
the  other  hand,  were  put  into  the  mouths  of  all 
members  of  the  Church,  whether  clergy  or  laity. 
To  the  thanksgiving,  for  instance,  offered  up  over 
each  newly  baptized  child  for  its  regeneration  just 
■effected,  the  laity  were  required  to  answer  Amen : 

10  RESULTS    OF   THE 

and  eacli  child  was  required  to  say,  before  it  could 
be  presented  for  Confirmation,  and  consequently 
for  Holy  Communion,  "  in  my  baptism,  wherein 
I  was  made  a  meml3er  of  Christ,  the  child  of  God, 
and  an  inheritor  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  But 
the  statements  thus  binding^  on  all,  and  on  some 
with  peculiar  stringency,  were  now  set  aside  in 
favour  of  statements  which  were  binding  with  less 
stringency,  and  on  a  number  of  persons  compara- 
tively small.  Nor  was  this  all.  Of  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles  King  Charles  I.  had  said  in  his 
Declaration,  "  Though  some  differences  have  been 
ill  raised,  yet  we  take  comfort  in  this,  that  all 
clergymen  within  our  realm  have  always  most  wil- 
lingly subscribed  to  the  Articles  established  .  .  . 
and  that  even  in  those  curious  jDoints  in  which  the 
present  differences  lie,  men  of  all  sorts  take  the 
Articles  of  the  Church  of  England  to  be  for  them." 
And  yet  this  was  the  document  to  override  state- 
ments so  remarkably  clear  and  precise  that  it  would 
be  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  devise  statements 
which  should  be  more  so. 

Such  was  the  triumph  achieved  for  the  Low- 
Church  party ;  a  triumph  giving  them  for  the  first 
time  a  legal  standing  in  the  Church  of  England  so 
far  as  touched  the  doctrine  of  Holy  Baptism  :  legal, 
we  say,  in  a  certain  sense,  though  in  another  sense 
their  position,  being  secured  by  the  perversion  of 
law,  was  still  as  illegal  as  ever.  And  this  triumph 
was  the  first  of  a  long  series,  of  which  it  forms  a 
fair  specimen  ;  illustrating  the  strength  of  the  Low- 
Church  influence,  the  cleverness  of  the  arguments 
used  in  defence  of  it,  the  boldness  of  the  Judcres. 


in  passing  their  decisions,  however  ignorant  they 
may  have  been  of  theology,  or  however  biassed  in 
the  interests  of  a  party ;  and,  as  the  resnh,,  the 
permissibiUty,  according  to  Privy  Conncil  law,  of 
accepting  plain  and  precise  formnlaries  in  senses 
the  very  reverse  of  what  to  ordinary  perceptions 
those  formularies  declared. 

It  is,  moreover,  curious,  though  not  surprising, 
to  note  that  when,  about  this  time,  some  six  or 
seven  Low-Church  clergymen  of  recognised  in- 
fluence met  together — the  Eev.  Charles  Bridges, 
the  Eev.  Edward  Bickersteth,  and  (as  we  believe) 
the  Eev.  Hugh  Stowell,  and  the  Eev.  Francis  Close, 
being  among  them — and  when  they  sought  to  ex- 
press what  their  own  views  severally  were  as  to 
the  positive  benefits  derived  from  Baptism,  it  was 
found  that  they  all  differed  from  one  another. 


Polemical  Period,  continued.  Erection  of  St.  Paul's  College, 
Cheltenham.  Papal  Aggression.  "  Durham  Letter."  Dr. 
M'Neile  on  Confession  and  Absolution.  Pievival  of  Convocation. 
Exeter  Sj-nod.  Episcopal  Pastoral  on  Eitual.  Division  of  Ser- 
vices. Evening  Communion.  Eev.  W.  J.  E.  Bennett,  Vicar 
of  Frome. 

"  To  assist  this  detestable  scheme 

Three  nuncios  from  Rome  are  come  over  ; 
They  left  Calais  on  Monday  by  steam. 
And  landed  to  dinner  at  Dover. 

An  army  of  grim  Cordeliers, 

Well  furnished  with  relics  and  vermin. 
Will  follow,  Lord  Westmoreland  fears, 

To  effect  what  their  chiefs  may  determine. 
Lollard's  bower,  good  authorities  say, 

Is  again  fitting  up  for  a  prison  ; 
And  a  wood-merchant  told  me  to-day 

'Tis  a  wonder  how  faggots  have  risen. 

12       ST.  Paul's  college,  Cheltenham. 

The  finance  scheme  of  Canning  contains 

A  new  Easter-offering  tax ; 
And  he  means  to  devote  all  the  gains 
To  a  bounty  on  thumbscrews  and  racks." 
— The  Country  Clergyman's  Trij}  to  Cambridge.     In  Lord 
Macaulay's  Miscellaneous  Writings  and  Speeches. 

In  the  year  1850  was  erected  the  building  known 
as  St.  Paul's  College,  Cheltenham.  It  formed  the 
premises  of  that  College  for  training  Low-Church 
schoolmasters  which  had  been  established  three 
years  before.  The  promoters  of  the  college  being 
differentlj^-minded  from  the  founders  of  our  old 
colleges,  no  provision  was  made  for  offering  the 
daily  service  of  the  Prayer-book,  or  for  the  cele- 
bration of  the  Holy  Eucharist,  within  the  college 
precincts.  The  sixty  resident  students  attended 
prayers  in  the  large  lecture-hall,  and  the  services 
in  St.  Paul's  Church  on  Sundays. 

It  need  not  be  said,  however,  that  this  is  not  that 
great  event  concerning  the  Church  of  England  to 
which  we  alluded  in  the  last  chapter.  That  event, 
which  also  happened  in  1850,  was  the  one  known 


A  few  years  after  the  Tractarian  movement  had 
commenced  there  had  commenced  a  flow  of  'verts 
(cor^verts  or  ^76?^verts,  according  to  the  point  from 
which  they  were  regarded)  to  the  obedience  of 
the  See  of  Eome.  We  have  seen  lists  of  'verts  for 
the  years  1842,  1843,  and  1844,  numbering  19,  17 
and  14  severally :  but  in  1845  the  number  rose  to 
68,  including  the  honoured  name  of  John  Henry 
Newman,  who  had  seceded  from  the  Church  of 
England  not  because  an  enhghtened  and  inde- 
pendent conscience  bade  him,  but  merely  because 


everybody  in  authority  said  that  he  ought.  And 
the  lists  for  the  three  following  years  cover  60,  62, 
and  27  respectively. 

News  of  all  this,  of  course,  reached  the  Vatican  ; 
and  the  hopes  of  the  Eomanists  for  the  return  of 
England  to  the  spiritual  yoke  of  Eome  were,  no 
doubt,  largely  exaggerated  to  Pope  Pius  IX.  Thia 
may  have  encouraged  his  Holiness  to  take,  with 
regard  to  England,  the  step  which  he  did  take  at 
the  time  whereof  we  speak  :  namely,  to  parcel  out 
Ensrland  and  Wales  into  thirteen  dioceses,  and 
appoint  a  diocesan  archbishop  or  bishop  over 
each ;  episcopal  functions  having  up  to  that  time 
been  fulfilled,  for  members  of  the  Eoman  Com- 
munion, by* Vicars- Apostolic,  taking  their  episcopal 
titles  from  places  in  Syria  and  other  countries. 
This  act  of  the  Pope  is  described  in  the  following 
terms  by  a  'vert : — "  From  the  See  of  St.  Peter  was 
issued  a  decree,  annihilating,  as  it  had  created,  the 
Dioceses  of  Canterbury  and  York,  Lincoln  and 
Chichester — the  cities  of  St.  Augustin  and  St.  Wil- 
frid, St.  Hugh  and  St.  Eichard,  were  no.  more — they 
were  blotted  off  the  ecclesiastical  map,  and  in  their 
place  were  created  Westminster  .  .  ,  Beverley  .  .  . 
Northampton  .   .   .  and  Shrewsbury." 

The  whole  mass  of  Anglican  Protestantism  went 
instantly  mad.  The  Papal  act  was,  of  course,  an 
insult  both  to  the  Church  of  England  and  also, 
perhaps,  to  the  English  Crown.  But  hardly  any- 
body seemed  to  remember  that  such  insults  were 
but  natural  results  of  those  Papal  principles  the 
existence  of  which  was  recognised  by  everybody. 
Eomanists,  as  men,  had  as  much  right  to  carry  their 


principles  into  practice  as  any  others  of  tlieir  fellow- 
men  had  to  carry  out  theirs,  provided  only  that 
they  remained  faithful  in  their  allegiance  to  the 
•Queen,  and  kept  the  Queen's  peace  :  and  no  act  of 
the  Pope  of  Eome  could  really  alter  any  English 
law,  whether  canonical  or  civil.  And  further,  al- 
though some  danger  might  arise  from  the  fact  that 
the  Eoman  communion  in  England  was  now  more 
perfectly  organised  than  it  had  been  before,  yet 
such  danger  could  only  come  contingently  on  Eo- 
manist  principles  being  taught  with  greater  zeal ; 
and  thus  it  might  be  entirely  neutralised  by  the 
efficient  teaching  of  such  true  Catholicism  as  was 
held  by  the  Established  Church.  No  one  of  these 
considerations,  however,  seemed  to  occur  to  any 
body  at  all,  save  only  a  very  few.  Anglican  Pro- 
testantism in  general  went  stark  mad.  Sermons 
were  preached,  indignation  meetings  were  held, 
speeches  were  delivered,  addresses  were  adopted 
and  presented,  and  more  speeches  made  in  reply. 
In  the  case  of  Lord  John  Eussell,  then  Prime 
Minister,  the  madness  showed  itself  in  the  follow- 
ing letter,  called  the  Durham  Letter  from  its  having 
been  addressed  to  the  Bishop  of  Durham  (Dr. 
Maltby)  :— 

"  My  dear  Lord, — I  agree  with  you  in  consider- 
ing '  the  late  aggression  of  the  Pope  upon  our 
Protestantism '  as  '  insolent  and  insidious,"  and  I 
therefore  feel  as  indignant  as  you  can  do  upon  the 

"  I  not  only  promoted  to  the  utmost  of  my 
power  the  claims  of  the  Eoman  Catholics  to  all 
civil  rights,  but  I  thought  it  right,  and  even  desir- 

"  DURHAM   LETTER."  15 

•able,  that  the  ecclesiastical  S3^stem  of  the  Eoman 
Catholics  should  be  the  means  of  giving  instruc- 
tion to  the  numerous  Irish  immigrants  in  London 
and  elsewhere,  who  without  such  help  would  have 
been  left  in  heathen  ignorance. 

"  This  might  have  been  done,  however,  without 
any  such  innovation  as  that  which  we  have  now  seen. 

"  It  is  impossible  to  confound  the  recent  mea- 
sures of  the  Pope  with  the  division  of  Scotland  into 
dioceses  by  the  Episcopal  Church,  or  the  arrange- 
ments of  districts  in  England  by  the  Wesleyan 

"There  is  an  assumption  of  power  in  all  the 
documents  which  have  come  from  Eome — a  pre- 
tension to  supremacy  over  the  realm  of  England, 
and  a  claim  to  sole  and  undivided  sway — which  is 
inconsistent  with  the  Queen's  supremacy,  with  the 
rights  of  our  bishops  and  clergy,  and  with  the 
spiritual  independence  of  the  nation,  as  asserted 
even  in  Eoman  Catholic  times. 

"  I  confess,  however,  that  my  alarm  is  not  equal 
to  my  indignation. 

"  Even  if  it  shall  appear  that  the  ministers  and 
servants  of  the  Pope  in  this  country  have  not 
transgressed  the  law,  I  feel  persuaded  that  we  are 
stron<^  enouo'll  to  repel  anv  outward  attacks.  The 
liberty  of  Protestantism  has  been  enjoyed  too  long 
in  England  to  allow  of  any  successful  attempt  to 
impose  a  foreign  yoke  upon  our  minds  and  con- 
sciences. No  foreign  prince  or  potentate  will  be 
permitted  to  fasten  his  fetters  upon  a  nation  which 
has  so  long  and  so  nobly  vindicated  its  right  to  free- 
dom of  opinion,  civil,  political,  and  religious. 


"Upon  this  subject,  then,  I  will  only  say  that 
the  present  state  of  the  law  shall  be  carefully  ex- 
amined, and  the  propriety  of  adopting  any  pro- 
ceedin<TS  with  reference  to  the  recent  assumption 
of  power  deliberately  considered. 

"  There  is  a  danger,  liowever,  which  alarms  me 
much  more  than  any  aggression  of  a  foreign  sove- 

"  Clergymen  of  our  own  Church,  who  have 
subscribed  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  and  acknow- 
ledged in  explicit  terms  the  Queen's  supremacy, 
have  been  the  most  forward  in  leading  their  flocks, 
'  step  by  step,  to  the  very  verge  of  the  precipice.' 
The  honour  paid  to  saints,  the  claim  of  infallibility 
for  the  Church,  the  superstitious  use  of  the  sign  of 
the  cross,  the  muttering  of  the  Liturgy  so  as  to 
disguise  the  language  in  which  it  is  written,  the 
recommendation  of  auricular  confession,  and  the 
administration  of  penance  and  absolution — all  these 
things  are  pointed  out  by  clergymen  of  the  Church 
of  England  as  worthy  of  adoption,  and  are  now 
openly  reprehended  by  the  Bishop  of  London  in  his 
charge  to  the  clergy  of  his  diocese. 

"  What,  then,  is  the  danger  to  be  apprehended 
from  a  foreign  prince  of  no  great  power,  compared 
to  the  danger  within  the  gates  from  the  unworthy 
sons  of  the  Church  of  England  herself? 

"  I  have  little  hope  that  the  propounders  and 
framers  of  these  innovations  will  desist  from  their 
insidious  course.  But  I  rely  with  confidence  on 
the  people  of  England,  and  I  will  not  bate  a  jot 
of  heart  or  hope  so  long  as  the  glorious  principles 
and  the  immortal  martyrs  of  the  Eeformation  shall 


be  had  in  reverence  by  the  great  mass  of  a  nation 
which  looks  with  contempt  on  the  mummeries 
of  superstition,  and  with  scorn  at  the  laborious 
endeavours  which  are  now  making  to  confine  the 
intellect  and  enslave  the  soul. 

"  I  remain,  with  great  respect,  &c. 

"  J.  EUSSELL. 
"Downing  Street,  November  4." 

Every  clergjaiian  who  did  not  run  along  with  the 
mad  public  rendered  himself  liable,  in  proportion 
to  the  prominence  of  his  position,  to  be  charged 
with  unfEiithfulness  to  his  trust.  Thus,  when  Arch- 
deacon Denison,  in  a  letter  to  the  Times,  deprecated 

(1)  the  uniting  with  the  Protestant  sects  against 
Eome  (holding,  as  the  Archdeacon  did,  all  such 
union  to  l^e  opposed  to  Church  principles,  and  to 
be  full  of  the  utmost  danger  to  those  principles) ; 

(2)  the  putting  aside,  in  the  excitement  of  present 
alarm,  the  fact  of  the  extreme  peril  to  which  the 
Church  of  England  was  exposed  from  the  aggres- 
sions of  the  civil  power;  and  (3)  the  appealing  to 
the  civil  power  to  interpose  between  the  Church 
of  England  and  the  Church  of  Eome,  because  he 
did  not  believe  that  the  Legjislature  would  find  it- 
self  in  any  position  to  do  in  that  matter  what  it 
was  being  asked  to  do,  this  letter  caused  him  to  be 
publicly  challenged,  by  Mr.  E.  Ayshford  Sanford, 
of  Nynehead  Court,  with  being  unfit  to  discharge 
the  trust  committed  to  him  in  the  Diocese  of  Bath 
and  Wells  as  Examining  Chaplain.* 

Two  more  occurrences  must  be  mentioned  under 
the  year  1850,  though  of  comparatively  small  im- 

*  Notes  ofrmjLife,  by  Archdeacon  Denison,  pp.  210,  &c. 
II.  3 


portance.  Dr.  McNeile,  preaching  at  St.  Paul's, 
Liverpool,  on  the  8th  of  December,  took  occa- 
sion to  refer  to  the  confessional ;  and  said  (accord- 
ing to  the  Liverpool  Mercury),  "  I  would  make  it 
a  capital  offence  to  administer  confession  in  this 
country.  Transportation  would  not  satisfy  me,  for 
that  would  merely  transfer  the  evil  from  one  part 
of  the  world  to  another.  Capital  punishment  alone 
would  satisfy  me.  Death  alone  would  prevent  the 
evil.  That  is  my  solemn  conviction."  He  said 
afterwards  that  he  had  been  misunderstood,  and 
characterised  the  expression  which  he  had  used 
"  as  a  most  atrocious  "  one.*  But  his  words  were 
plain  ;  and  he  never  stated  what  he  had  meant  to 
be  understood  by  them,  other  than  as  they  tliem- 
selves  implied. 

The  other  occurrence  to  be  noted  here  is  that 
when  four  clergymen  of  St.  Saviour's,  Leeds,  seceded 
to  Eome,  at  the  end  of  the  year,  and  one  remained 
faithful  to  the  Church  of  England,  that  one  (the 
Eev.  W.  Henry  Frederick  Beckett)  was  inhibited 
by  the  Bishop  (Dr.  Longley)  from  the  exercise  of  all 
clerical  functions  in  the  diocese. f 

We  have  already  noted  the  formation  of  two 
Low-Church  Societies,  both,  apparently,  in  rivalry 
to  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in 
Foreign  Parts — to  wit,  the  Newfoundland  School 
Society  in  1823,  and  the  Colonial  Church  Society 
in  1835.  In  the  year  1851  the  two  were  united 
under  one  title,  viz.  "The  Colonial  Church  and 
School  Society."     The  name  was  changed  in  1861, 

*   Chvrch  Times,  August  20,  1860. 
t  76.  March  2,  1877,  p.  126. 


as  we  shall  see  hereafter,  to  "The  Colonial  and 
Continental  Church  Society." 

The  same  year  (1851)  is  famous  in  the  annals  of 
the  modern  Church  of  England  as  that  in  which 
Convocation,  after  having  been  suppressed  ever 
since  1717,  assembled  for  the  despatch  of  business. 
Faithful  clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England  had 
been  more  and  more  confirmed  in  the  opinion  that 
the  proper  remedies  for  numerous  evils  from  which 
the  Church  was  sufTerino-  were  to  be  sought  through 
a,  revival  of  the  Church's  own  constitutional  leo^is- 
lative  assemblies,  the  Convocations  of  Canterbury 
and  York  ;  and  even  the  Presbyterian  Dr.  Chalmers 
had  thought  such  revival  reasonable,  and  said  so. 

The  revival  of  Convocation,  however,  as  of  an 
active  agent  was  deprecated  by  Low-Churchmen 
in  general,  and  by  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  in 
particular.  Mr.  Goode,  indeed,  thought  that  the 
practical  extinction  of  Convocation  was  a  hard- 
ship to  the  Church,  and  that  the  Church  ought  to 
be  able  to  adapt  her  laws  to  the  exigencies  of 
the  times  ;  but  he  seems  to  have  preferred  a  Protes- 
tant High  Commission  of  clergy  and  laity  together. 
The  Editor  of  the  Christian  Observer  wrote  in  his 
August  number,  "  We  see  no  reason  to  change  our 
views  as  to  the  danger  of  caUing  either  the  ancient 
powers  of  Convocation,  or  a  new  machinery  of  the 
same  kind,  into  action."  *  And  when,  in  spite  of 
opposition  and  ridicule.  Convocation  was  allowed 
to  deliberate /or  three  days,  the  Editor  still  deemed 
that  Convocation,  as  it  then  was,  should  not  be 
permitted  to  act,  and  called  for  the  large  infusion 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1851,  p.  580. 



of  a  lay  element :  desiring  that  lay  members  should 
be  chosen  by  congregations  or  communicants  (the 
question  of  Communion  as  a  test  of  qualification 
for  an  elector  being  apparently,  in  his  view,  an 
open  one),  and  that  such  lay  members  should  have 
licence  to  deliberate  with  the  clergy,  but  to  vote 
alone.  Some  years  later,  when  Convocation  had 
made  itself  somewhat  of  a  power  in  the  land,  the 
policy  of  the  Low-Church  party  was  to  labour  for 
the  election  of  Low-Church  members.  At  present 
their  tactics  were  those  of  general  opposition  ; 
prompted,  no  doubt,  by  the  feeling  that  neither 
their  theology  nor  their  general  religious  system 
was  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  principles  of 
the  Church  of  England.  Lideed,  the  Christian  Ob- 
server* expressed  in  1859  "a  deep  conviction  that 
Convocation "  was  "  positively  injurious  to  the 

It  was  probably  the  same  principle  which  had 
influenced  many  Low-Churchmen  of  the  Diocese  of 
Exeter,  with  respect  to  Bishop  Philpotts'  synod, 
mentioned  in  a  former  chapter.  Out  of  about  800 
clergy  in  the  diocese,  which  then  included  the 
county  of  Cornwall,  about  300  had  been  present  in 
the  Chapter-house  at  Exeter ;  and  of  the  remainder, 
more  than  100  solemnly  protested  against  the  whole 

The  deadness,  however,  of  Low-Church  church- 
manship  did  not  hinder  the  Church's  progress  in 
the  matter,  so  vastly  important  to  her  wellbeing,  of 
the  revival  of  Convocation.  In  December  1851  the 
Convocation  of  the  Province  of  Canterbury  met, 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1859,  p.  214. 


deliberated  during  three  days,  addressed  the  Crown, 
and  appointed  committees  of  both  Houses  for  con- 
sideration of  various  matters.  According  to  the 
Christian  Observer,  it  was  impossible  not  to  see  that 
the  great  powers  of  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  would  be 
fearlessly,  and  (it  was  feared)  mischievously,  exer- 
cised in  all  the  debates  of  that  assembly. 

In  or  about  the  same  year  (1851)  most  of  the 
bishops  united  in  putting  forth  a  pastoral  to  the 
clergy.*  This  pastoral  was  much  the  sort  of  thing 
which  was  to  have  been  expected,  coming  as  it  did 
fromwell-meaningpeople,of  whomnotone  had  made 
liturgiology  a  study,  few,  if  any,  were  altogether 
sound  on  the  principles  of  Divine  Service,  or  indeed 
of  theology  in  general,  and  all  were  anxious  to 
avoid  everything  like  a  breeze.  The  unsoundness 
was  manifested  in  the  line  which  their  Lordships 
took  with  reference  to  one  particular  "  evil "  (as 
they  called  it).  A  principle  had,  they  said,  been 
avowed  "  that,  as  the  Church  of  England  is  the 
ancient  Cathohc  Church  settled  in  this  land  before 
the  Eeformation,  and  was  then  reformed  only  by 
the  casting  away  of  certain  strictly  defined  corrup- 
tions ;  therefore,  whatever  form  or  usage  existed 
in  the  Church  before  the  Eeformation  may  now  be 
freely  introduced  and  observed,  unless  there  can 
be  alleged  against  it  the  distinct  letter  of  some 
formal  prohibition."  Against  this  the  bishops  had 
nothing  to  urge  but  their  "  clear  and  unhesitating 

*  This  pastoral  is  printed  in  the  Life  of  Bisliop  Sumner,  pp. 
350,  &c.,  but  no  date  is  given.  Nor  is  the  date  indicated  in  the 
Christian  Observer,  though,  from  one  passage  in  that  periodical,  the 
pastoral  would  seem  to  have  been  issued  before  May  1851.  (See 
Christian  Observer  for  1851,  p.  359.) 


protest."  No  shadow  of  an  argument  grounded  on 
any  shadow  of  a  premiss  :  nothing  but  a  protest ! 
What  wonder  that  the  ritual  movement  (as  it  soon 
came  to  be  called)  went  on  as  steadily  as  it  had 
done  before  ?  Nor  was  the  pastoral  a  whit  more 
successful  with  Low-Churchmen  than  with  the 
High-Churchmen.  The  bishops  had  besought  all 
who,  whether  by  excess  or  defect^  had  broken  in 
upon  the  uniformity  and  contributed  to  relax  the 
authority  of  our  ritual  observances  to  consider  the 
importance  of  unity  and  order,  and  by  common 
consent  to  avoid  whatever  might  tend  to  violate  the 
same.  The  Low-Church  party,  however,  do  not 
seem  to  have  made  (save  in  a  few  cases)  any  effort 
to  attain  even  the  minimum  amount  of  ritual  cor- 
rectness required  by  the  plainest  rubrics. 

The  year  1852  deserves  to  be  noticed  as  dating 
one  of  those  few  improvements  in  regard  of  Divine 
Service  for  which  the  Low-Church  party  can  be 
peculiarly  credited  :  we  mean,  the  division  of  ser- 
vices. Many  Low-Church  clergymen,  indeed,  had 
commenced  evening  services  properly  so  called  ; 
and  there  had  been  in  sundry  churches  early  cele- 
brations of  the  Eucharist,  apart  from  Mattins ;  but, 
ordinarily,  no  one  had  ever  dreamt  of  offering 
Divine  Service  on  Sunday  morning  without  first 
saying  Mattins  as  far  as  the  Third  Collect  inclusive, 
then  the  Litany,  and  then  the  first  part  of  the  Eu- 
charistic  office,  including  the  delivery  of  a  sermon ; 
all  these  offices  following  one  another  in  succession, 
with  no  other  intervals  between  them  save  what 
might  suffice  for  the  singing  of  a  few  metrical 
stanzas  :  the  whole  occupying,  it  might   be,  two 

EEV.    J.    C.    MILLER.  23 

hours,  or  even  three  or  nearly  so,  if  there  was  to 
be  a  celebration  of  the  Eucharist. 

To  the  Eev.  J.  C.  Miller,  Eector  of  St.  Martin's, 
Birmingham,  belongs  the  chief  honour  of  effecting 
a  change  in  regard  hereof.  A  Low-Church  clergy- 
man in  the  Diocese  of  Oxford  had,  indeed,  preceded 
him  in  using  the  Litany  as  a  Sunday  afternoon  ser- 
vice, reciting  Evensong  at  a  later  hour  ;  but  Mr. 
Miller  was,  we  believe,  the  first  clergyman  who 
carried  out  the  principle  of  dividing  the  services  to 
as  great  an  extent  as  will  presently  be  shown,  and 
with  the  full  approval  of  his  diocesan.  Though,  by 
the  way,  that  approval  might  reasonably  have  been 
withheld  with  regard  to  one  item,  to  which  we 
shall  draw  the  reader's  special  attention  presently. 

In  December  1851  Mr.  Miller  had  issued  a  cir- 
cular letter  to  his  parishioners,  announcing  certain 
changes  as  about  to  take  place  in  the  conduct  of 
Divine  Service  in  their  parish  church  in  the  follow- 
ing January,  by  way  of  experiment.  The  changes 
were  accepted  kindly  by  the  congregation,  and 
after  six  months,  after  some  modifications  which 
experience  showed  to  be  necessary,  the  following 
programme  was  finally  adopted,  of  services  for 
one  month : — 



First  Sunday 

Second  Sunday 

Third  Sunday 

Fourth  Sunday 

Fifth  Sunday 




No  Sermon. 















































Sermon  to 




Young,  or 




























We  might  indeed  demur,  perhaps,  to  expressing 
approval  of  the  recitation  of  any  part  of  the  Eu- 
charistic  Office  at  the  ahar  by  itself,  such  recitation 
tending,  we  should  think,  to  obscure  the  nature  of 
that  part  of  the  Office  when  forming  part  of  a  cele- 
bration. A  far  worse  matter,  however,  was  the 
proposal,  which  the  reader  will  have  noticed  in  the 
above  programme,  to  celebrate  the  Holy  Eucharist 
once  a  month  in  the  afternoon,  and  once  a  month 
in  the  evening.  Such  a  thing  was  not,  indeed,  ab- 
solutely without  precedent,  however  contrary  to 


the  usage  of  the  Universal  Church.  Thus  the  Very 
Eev.  Thomas  Dale,  an  old-fashioned  High-Church- 
man, was  accustomed  at  one  time  to  celebrate  in 
the  evening,  solely  for  the  purpose  of  affording 
more  opportunities  for  the  reception  of  the  Holy 
Communion  ;  and  his  example  had  been  followed 
by  many  other  clergymen  of  piety  and  learning. 
All  these,  however,  like  Mr.  Dale  himself,  had  soon 
given  up  the  practice  as  not  orthodox.*  But  the 
canon  law  by  which  the  Church  of  England  was 
(and  still  is)  bound  forbids  the  commencement  of 
a  celebration  after  midday.  Feelings  of  reverence 
will  prompt  the  well-instructed  Christian  not  to 
receive  that  l^read  which  the  Lord  calls  His  Body 
into  a  full  stomach,  but  rather,  if  possible  consis- 
tently with  spiritual  freshness  and  activity,  to  com- 
municate fasting ;  even  as,  when  the  Lord's  Body, 
being  in  the  state  of  death,  was  buried.  It  was 
buried  in  a  sepulchre  wherein  no  man  had  yet  lain. 
No  thoughts  of  this  kind,  however,  seem  to  have 
presented  themselves  to  the  mind  of  Mr.  Miller  ; 
and  his  practice  did  but  agree  with  his  theology 
when  he  invited  those  parishioners  who  might  desire 
it  to  communicate  on  the  third  and  fourth  Sun- 
days of  every  month  in  the  afternoon  and  evening 
severally.  And  in  the  course  of  time  the  practice 
found  its  way  into  almost  every  church  which  was 
in  a  town  and  served  by  a  Low-Churchman.  It 
was  found  a  very  convenient  mode  of  testifying 
against  the  doctrine  of  the  Eeal  Presence,  and  of 

*  This  was  testified  by  Mr.  Dale's  son,  the  Rev.  Lawford  W.  T. 
Dale,  in  a  letter  to  the  Church  Times  of  September  16,  1881. 

26         REV.    W.    J.    E.    BENNETT. — REV.    A.    D.    WAGNER. 

confirming  Protestant  hearers  in  their  disbehef  of 
that  CathoHc  truth. 

The  same  year  (1852),  the  Eev.  Wilham  John 
Early  Bennett,  having  deemed,  in  consequence  of 
certain  correspondence  with  the  Bishop  of  London 
(Dr.  Blomfield),  that  he  was  bound  in  honour  to- 
resign  the  incumbency  of  St.  Paul's,  Knightsbridge, 
and  St.Barnabas's,  Pimlico,  was,  on  the  presentation 
of  the  Dowager  Marchioness  of  Bath  (the  Marquis 
being  a  minor),  appointed  to  the  vicarage  of  Frome 
Selwood,  Somersetshire.  Hereupon  some  of  his 
clerical  brethren,  Low-Churchmen,  remonstrated 
with  the  Dowager  Marchioness.  Complaint  was 
also  made  to  the  Bishop  of  Chichester  (Dr.  Gilbert) 
against  the  Eev.  Arthur  D.  Wagner,  Licumbent  of 
St.  Paul's,  Brighton ;  in  consequence  of  which  the 
Bishop  thought  it  necessary  to  remark  on  the  enor- 
mity of  which,  it  seems,  Mr.  Wagner  had  been 
guilty — that  of  giving  to  some  members  of  his  flock 
"  pictorial  crucifixes  in  height  four  and  one-eighth 
inches  by  two  and  five-eighth  [sic],  and  weighing 
two  ounces,"  which  pictorial  crucifixes  (whatever 
that  expression  may  have  meant)  were  "  well 
adapted  either  to  be  suspended  in  the  closet  or 
worn  upon  the  person,  or  to  be  kept  before  the 
eyes  on  the  table,  in  short,  to  be  in  either  constant 
or  occasional  use,  and  therefore  in  a  way  to  lead 
to  a  superstitious  use  of  them." 

]^ut  the  principal  object  of  Low-Church  warfare 
in  the  year  1852  was  Miss  Sellon  and  her  estabhsh- 
ment  of  AngHcan  Sisters  :  of  which  we  will  speak 
in  the  next  chapter. 

MISS  sellon's  sisterhood.  2T 


Polemical  Period,  continued.  Miss  Sellon  and  her  Sisterhood  at- 
tacked by  the  Rev.  J.  Spurrell.  Prayer-book  Revision  Society. 
Low-Church  plot  for  Religious  Comprehension  in  Australia. 

"  \\1ierefore  lookest  Thou  upon  them  that  deal  treacherously^ 
and  boldest  Thy  tongue  when  the  wicked  devom-eth  the  man  that 
is  more  righteous  than  he  ?  " — Habakkuk  i.  13. 

The  records  of  Mr.  Ferrar's  establishment,  at  Little 
Gidding,  in  Huntingdonshire,  of  persons  devoted 
to  a  life  of  special  religious  observances,  had  been 
in  the  hands  of  Anglican  Churchmen  ever  since 
Isaac  Walton  published  his  Lives.  Li  the  general 
revival  of  spiritual  life,  both  individual  and  cor- 
porate, which  had  commenced  in  the  Church  of 
England,  it  was  to  be  expected  that  in  that  Church, 
as  in  other  ancient  branches  of  the  Christian  com- 
munity, attempts  would  be  made  sooner  or  later 
to  revive  monasticism  in  some  form  or  other.. 
Accordingly,  we  find  that  at  the  period  to  which 
in  the  course  of  our  narrative  we  are  now  come 
such  attempts  had  been  made,  and  were  being 
carried  on.  It  was,  moreover,  to  be  expected  that 
such  attempts,  in  the  utter  lack  of  Anglican  teaching 
upon  the  subject,  should  lead  to  various  mistakes, 
some  in  respect  of  detail,  and  some  even  in  respect 
of  principle.  And  so  it  actually  was :  and  Low- 
Church  people  were  forward  to  use  the  mistakes 
as  excuses  for  attacking  both  the  s}^stem  of  monas- 
ticism, and  also  the  persons  who  were  endeavour- 
ing to  carry  it  out. 

Foremost  in  these  attacks  was  the  Eev.  James 

28  REV.    J.    SPURRELL    AND 

Spurrell,  Vicar  of  Great  Shelford,  Cambridgeshire. 
"  The  Eomaiiisers  within  our  Church  [said  he]  are 
now  working  ....  through  a  system  most  in- 
vidiously and  artfully  contrived  ....  designed 
to  entrap  the  unwary,  and  lead  them  ignorantly 
forwards,  till  they  have  made  them,  in  reality  if 
not  in  name,  Eomanists." 

The  above  is  extracted  from  a  pamphlet  pub- 
lished in  1852,  and  entitled  Miss  Sellon  and  the 
*'  Sisters  of  Mercy T  An  Exposure  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, Rules,  Religious  Views,  and  Practical  Working 
of  their  Society.  In  support  of  his  sweeping  and 
serious  charge  Mr.  Spurrell  cited  a  letter  from 
Miss  Sellon,  the  Superior  of  the  first-formed  and 
infant  Sisterhood  ;  in  reference  whereto  he  asked, 
"  Is  not  such  an  exhortation  as  '  Think  of  your- 
self as  ever  kneeling  under  the  shadow  of  the 
cross,  at  His  sacred  feet,' — where  the  symbol  is 
employed  instead  of  the  word  [Miss  Sellon  having, 
in  place  of  the  word  "  cross,"  drawn  a  cross  with 
her  pen], — more   likely  than   otherwise    to   have 

impressed  Miss with  the  idea,  that,  after  all, 

Eomanism,  which  is  so  fond  of  the  display  of  this 
symbol,  had  reality  on  its  side  ?  "  We  will  venture 
to  affirm  that  no  professor  of  Eoman  controversy 
ever  taught  his  students  such  an  argument  for 
the  reality  of  the  Eoman  claims  as  this  which 
Mr.  Spurrell  considered  likely  to  have  impressed 

Miss  .     It  reminds  us  of  the  trouble  which 

some  Christian  missionaries  had  with  Jews  in  the 
north  of  Africa  many  years  ago.  One  of  the 
Hebrew  vowels,  that  which  is  sounded  like  the 
English   aw,  is  represented  by  a  mark  like  a  T. 


Now  it  SO  happened  that  in  an  edition  of  the 
Pentateuch  which  was  beincf  circulated  amono-st 
those  Jews  the  type  of  this  vowel  had,  in  one  par- 
ticular place,  a  minute  air-bubble  adhering  to  the 
top  of  it ;  the  result  of  which  was  that  in  some 
copies  the  impression  of  this  type  had  the  shape 
of  a  cross.  And  this  was  believed  by  the  Jews 
(who  did  not  know  anything  about  printing)  to 
have  been  contrived  by  the  Christians  to  the  end 
that  when  Jews  used  copies  of  the  Sacred  Book  so 
printed,  the  cross  might  act  as  a  spell,  and  con- 
vert them  to  Christianity  !'  In  the  course  of  Mr. 
Spurrell's  narrative  we  read,  "  Miss  Sellon  likewise 

expressed  her  belief  that  Miss was  not  fully 

acquainted  with  the  faith  in  her  own  Church ;  as 
much  that  she  had  advanced  as  peculiar  to  the 
Eoman,  the  Anglo-Catholic  Church  had  always 
held,  namely,  the  sacramental  efficacy  of  confes- 
sion, penance,  the  Apostolic  succession,  and  prayers 
for  the  departed ;  and  had  ever  upheld  the  re- 
ligious vocation,  thouo-h  for  a  season  it  had  been 
permitted  to  lie  dormant.  Confession,  further,  she 
stated,  was  practised  by  her  children,  who  were 
under  spiritual  guides  ;  and  that  the  Holy  Com- 
munion was  administered  to  them  every  morning. 

After  this  she  exhorted  Miss to  listen  to  the 

teaching  of  her  own  Church,  with  all  himiility,  and 
there  would  be  found  no  necessity  for  her  to  go 
into  another  Communion  for  what  she  sought 

This  exhortation,  we  should  have  thought,  would 
have  been  sufficient  of  itself  to  repel  the  charge  of 
Eomanising.      And  indeed   the   intelligent  reader 

30  MISS  sellon's  sisterhood. 

will  have  perceived  at  once  how  false  were  the 
charges  brought  against  Miss  Sellon,  as  far  as  we 
have  stated  them.  Her  accuser  proceeded  to  stig- 
matise the  Office-book  used  in  her  Society  as  having 
"  much  in  it  quite  at  variance  with  our  Eeformed 
Eeligion ; "  but  in  support  of  this  position  he 
specified  nothing  worse  than  a  direction  to  sign 
•oneself  with  the  sign  of  the  cross,  and  petitions  for 
the  faithful  departed :  and  he  asked,  towards  the 
conclusion  of  his  so-called  "  Exposure,"  the  ques- 
tions which  read   like  a  sad  satire "What 

does  Protestantism,  what  does  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land know  of  the  '  sign  of  the  cross '  being  a 
sacramental  symbol  in  the  which  there  '  lies  deep 
mystery  ?  '  "  (This  was  in  allusion  to  a  passage 
cited  from  the  Sisters'  Office  of  Admission.) 
"  Wliat  does  the  Church  know  of  confession  for- 
mally and  frequently  made  to  a  priest  ?  Wliat  of 
penance ;  of  the  keeping  the  '  Canonical  Hours  ; ' 
....  And  what  of  conventual  institutions  ?  " 

We  say  nothing  of  numerous  statements  made 
by  this  clergyman,  but  which  Miss  Sellon  in  her 
published  reply  denied.  We  have  said  enough  to 
show  the  animus  of  Low-Church  opposition  to  a 
movement  which  has  now  spread  so  much  as  to 
become  one  of  the  recognised  agencies  of  the 
Church  of  England.  But  perhaps  the  most  in- 
structive point  in  the  controversy  (for  Mr.  Spurrell 
had  the  assurance  to  publish  a  rejoinder)  was  the 
tacit  assumption  on  this  writer's  part  that  what- 
ever was  contrary  to  Protestant  ideas  was  on  that 
ground  alone  to  be  condemned.  His  appeal  was 
almost  invariably  not  to  any  common  standard  of 


riofht  and  wronii',  but  to  what  Protestants  think. 
And  this  was  the  Hne  most  frequently  taken  by 
Low-Church  controversiahsts :  if  they  began  by 
appeaUng  to  Scripture,  they  most  generally  ended 
by  appealing  to  popular  ignorance  and  prejudice. 

Of  1853  the  only  event  bearing  upon  the  Low- 
Church  party  which  we  have  to  chronicle  is  that 
mentioned  by  Archdeacon  Denison  in  his  Notes  of 
his  Life,  to  wit,  that  he,  the  Archdeacon,  did  all 
he  could  to  take  away  from  Mi".  Gladstone  his  seat 
in  Parliament  for  the  University  of  Oxford  in  that 
year,  and  only  failed  in  the  attempt  owing  to  Low- 
Churchmen's  being  (as  he  says)  afraid  of  him.* 

The  next  year  (1854)  witnessed  the  formation  of 
the  Prayer-book  Ee vis  ion  Society,  to  which  we 
shall  draw  attention  more  at  length  when,  in  the 
course  of  these  Anxals,  we  come  to  speak  of  the 
Immoral  Period.  And  akin  to  this  was  the  form- 
ing; of  a  plot  in  England  for  execution  abroad,  to 
the  detriment  of  the  Anglican  Communion  in  gene- 
ral ;  and  the  mention  whereof  belongs  to  this  same 
part  of  our  narrative.  The  case  was  what  we  shall 
now  describe. 

An  extract  from  a  letter  written  by  the  Eev. 
Henry  Venn  (the  younger)  to  his  brother  in  August 
1854,  and  given  by  Mr.  Knight  in  his  Memoir  of 
the  former,  runs  thus  : — "  Praise  God  for  the  ap- 
pointment of  Frederick  Barker  to  Sydney.  Sir 
•George  Grey  expressed  himself  highly  pleased  with 
the  account  of  him.  .  .  .  All  my  spare  thoughts 
are  now  devoted  to  the  drawing  up  of  suggestions 
for  Barker  and  Perry  to  make  the  foundation  of 

*  Notes  of  my  Life,  p.  103. 


the  Episcopal  Church  in  Austraha  wide  enough 
for  a  measure  of  comprehension.  The  colony  is 
quite  prepared  for  it,  and  longing  to  merge  all  sects 
in  two — Protestants  and  Papists."  *  Dr.  Barker 
was  consecrated  in  this  year  (1854)  to  the  metro- 
politan see  of  Sydney ;  Dr.  Perry  had  been  conse- 
crated in  the  year  1847  to  the  see  of  Melbourne. 
Both  these  prelates  worked  their  dioceses  on  Low- 
Church  lines  as  far  as  they  could ;  and  left  them 
in  consequence,  when  they  did  leave  them,  in  a 
very  low  condition  of  Church  life.  One  of  them 
(we  believe  it  was  Bishop  Perry)  compelled  a 
cleroyman  to  leave  the  diocese  because  he  held  the 
doctrine  of  the  Eeal  Presence  in  the  Eucharist. 

The  nature  of  the  plot  indicated  in  the  above 
extract  will  be  evident  from  the  views  held  by  the 
party  to  which  Barker,  Perry,  and  Venn  belonged. 
It  was  not  a  design  for  winning  over  to  the  faith 
of  the  Church  of  Eng-land  those  who  were  in  some 
respects  denying  it ;  it  was  not  a  plan  for  convert- 
ing to  the  Church's  religious  practice  those  who 
were  deeming  that  practice  to  be  in  some  respects 
sinful;  it  did  not  aim  merely  at  removing  what 
a  liberally-minded  person  must  needs  regard  as 
stumbling-blocks  to  the  uninformed,  and  to  which 
the  Divine  Word  ought  to  be  regarded  as  applying 
— "  Take  up  the  stumbling-block  out  of  the  way 
of  My  people,"  f — such  as  a  mistranslation  of  Scrip- 
ture, or  the  use  of  an  old  word  in  a  sense  not  now 
commonly  attributed  to  it.  No :  what  Mr.  Venn 
evidently   contemplated,    and   what   he    evidently 

*  Knif^ht's  Memoir  of  the  licv.  H.   Vcnv,  B.D.     New  edition, 
London,  1882,  p.  305.  t  Isa.  Ivii.  14. 


expected  that  the  two  above-named  prehites  would 
have  laboured  to  effect — what,  indeed,  it  is  likely 
enough  that  they  did  labour  to  effect — was  the 
relaxation  of  clerical  eno-agements  in  such  a  way 
as,  while  perhaps  shutting  out  from  Anglican 
ministry  more  effectually  than  before  those  who 
held  the  Catholic  faith  in  its  integrity,  would 
make  room  for  those  who  denied  that  faith  in  one 
at  least  of  its  articles. 


Polemical  Period,  continued.  Low-Church  Opposition  to  the  Sacra- 
mental System.  Suit  brought  by  Westerton.  Sabbatarianism. 
Eev.  H.  Alford  and  the  Becord.  Bishop  Gobat  and  Schismatics 
in  Scotland.  Eev.  Hem-y  Cotterill  appointed  to  the  See  of 
Grahamstown.     Opening  of  St.  Aidan's  College,  Birkenhead. 

The  Christian  Observer  *  speaks  of  the  Tractarian 
movement  as  having  been  about  this  time  in  a 
state  of  gradual  withering  and  decay.  This  must 
have  been  a  case  in  which  the  wish  was  father  to 
the  thought ;  for  although  the  Low-Church  party 
had  very  much  their  own  way,  the  prejudices  of 
the  general  public  being  on  their  side,  and  although 
the  bishops  in  general  were  ready  to  do  what  they 
could  for  discouraging  Tractarians,  yet  there  were 
not  wanting  indications  of  life  and  activity  in  the 
obnoxious  party.  In  1854  a  petition  had  been 
presented  to  the  Queen  begging  her  Majesty  to 
take  measures  that  the  sacramental  system  in  the 
Church  of  England  might  be  done  away  with ;  for 
that  one  place  was  not  to  be  considered  more  holy 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1855. 
II.  4 


than  another  place,  or  one  person  more  holy  than 
another  person.     This  petition  had  been  signed  by- 
fifty  members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  forty 
peers.     In  the  same  year  Cuddesdon  College  had 
been  opened  in  the  Diocese  of  Oxford  as  a  place 
of  special  education  for  the  Anglican   ministry  ; 
and  it  speedily  brought  itself  into  the  hostility  of 
the  Low-Church  party,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter. 
Mr.  Westerton,  too,  a  bookseller,  and  parishioners' 
churchwarden  of  St.  Paul's,  Knightsbridge,  distin- 
guished  himself  by  his   warfare  against   various 
articles   in   use   there.     He   had   already,    in   his 
official  capacity,  taken  upon  him  to  remove  floral 
decorations  from  the  altar ;  and  he  now  took  legal 
proceedings  against  the  use  in  that  church,  not 
only  of  the  carved  oaken  altar,  with  the  cross  and 
candlesticks,   but   also   of    the   various    coloured 
coverings  for  the  altar,  and  such  altar-linen  as  had 
embroidery  or  any  other  ornament  about  it :  true 
to  the  traditions  of  Protestantism,     Mr.  Westerton 
had  previously  complained  to  the  Bishop  of  London 
(Dr.  Blomfield)  of  the  way  in  which  Divine  Service 
was   conducted,   and   chiefly   about   the    musical 
rendering  of  it,  and  the  processions  of  incumbent 
and  curates  to  and  from  the  vestry  ;  but  specify- 
ing also  as  objectionable  the  use   of  flowers  for 
ecclesiastical  ornament,  and  not  omitting  to  notice 
that  during  the  sermon  the  curates  were  guilty  of 
the  enormity  of  remaining  "  hidden  from  the  con- 
gregation in  the  sedilia  by  the  side  of  the  altar, 
like  monks  and  Roman  Cathohc  priests." 

To   this    suit   we   shall  have  occasion  to  refer 
again :  we  only  notice  its  commencement  here  as 


showing  the  mind  of  the  Low-Church  party  towards 
■everything  which  was  not  done  in  their  way — ■ 
everything  beautiful  about  God's  house — every- 
thing dignified  about  God's  service.  It  was  the 
same  mind  which  had  shown  itself  in  1837  against 
some  Oxford  clergy  on  account  of  their  wearing 
surplices  or  scarves  which  had  crosses  embroidered 
upon  them,  and  bowing  at  different  parts  of  the 
service,  and  facing  east  at  prayer ;  which  had 
shown  also  much  zeal  against  the  figure  of  a  cross 
in  a  stained-glass  window  over  the  altar  ;  and  in 
which  an  excellent  clergyman  of  our  own  acquaint- 
ance received  notice  to  quit  the  curacy  which  he 
held  about  the  time  to  which  the  present  chapter 
refers,  and  for  no  other  alleged  reason  save  that 
he  had  a  bands-case  or  sermon-case  (we  forget 
which)  made  of  velvet,  and  with  a  yellow  cross 
worked  upon  it  by  one  of  his  female  parishioners. 

The  Sabbatarian  views  held  by  the  Low-Church 
party  gave  practical  offence  this  year  to  a  large 
part  of  the  London  public.  Those  views  were,  it 
will  be  remembered,  that  the  Fourth  Command- 
ment was  as  much  a  part  of  the  Moral  Law  as  any 
other  precept  in  the  Decalogue,  and  that  therefore 
it  was  binding  upon  Christians  as  well  as  upon 
Jews,  and  would  be  binding  till  the  end  of  time  ; 
there  being,  however,  a  certain  latitude  allowed 
for  the  sake  of  performing  works  of  necessity  or 
mercy.  Only  that  the  Apostles,  acting  under 
inspiration  of  God  the  Holy  Ghost,  changed  the 
day  from  the  seventh  of  the  week  to  the  first.  A 
passage  of  Isaiah  was  considered  as  throwing  light 
upon  the  manner  in  which  the  Sabbath  was  to  be 



kept  holy ;  and  the  child  of  Low-Church  parents 
was  taught  that  on  Sunday  he  was  not  to  do  his 
own  works,  nor  to  find  his  own  pleasure,  nor  to 
speak  his  own  words :  that  is  to  say,  he  was  not 
to  do  any  secular  business,  or  to  take  any  secular 
amusement,  or  to  talk  about  secular  matters.     To 
which   restrictions   some   Low-Churchmen    added 
another,  grounded  on  the  words  in  Exodus,  "  Abide 
ye  every  man  in  his  place,  let  no  man  go  out  of 
his  place  on  the  seventh  day."  *     Thus  Mr.  Bicker- 
steth  would  not  allow  his  servants  to  go  out  on 
Sunday.     Sabbatarian  views  were  held  l^y  the  Low- 
Churchman  Dr.  Bird  Sumner,  now  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury.     St.  Paul  had  written  in  his  Epistle 
to   the   Eomans,    "  One   man    esteemeth  one  day 
above  another  :  another  esteemeth  every  day  alike. 
Let  every  man  be  fully  persuaded  in  his  own  mind. 
He  that  regardeth  the  day,  regardeth  it  unto  the 
Lord ;  and  he  that  regardeth  not  the  day,  to  the 
Lord  he  doth  not  regard  it."  f     These  words,  how- 
ever, do  not  appear  to  have  exercised  practically 
any  modifying  influence  at  all  upon  Dr.  Sumner's 
Sabbatarianism,  though  the  perplexity  which  they 
do  seem  to  have  caused  him  when   writing   his 
Commentary  on  the  Epistle  he  sought  to  avoid  by 
ignoring  the  words    altogether.     And   as,    a  few 
years  later,  a  writer  in  the  Christian  Observer  ex- 
pressed the  opinion  that  Volunteer  bands  ought 
not  to  play  on  Sunday  when  marching  to  church,J 
so  now  it  occurred  to  his  Grace  that  he  had,  as 
Archbishop   of   Canterbury,    an    influence   which 

•  Exod.  xvi.  29.  t  Eom.  xiv.  5,  6. 

X  Christian  Observer  for  18G0,  p.  866. 

AND   THE   RECORD.  37 

might  be  usefully  exercised  against  what  he 
deemed  to  be  Sabbath-breaking.  So  he  addressed 
a  letter  to  Sir  Benjamin  Hall,  Bart.,  then  Chief 
Commissioner  for  Her  Majesty's  Woods  and  Forests, 
asking  that  the  bands  might  be  forbidden  to  play 
in  the  parks  on  Sundays.  Naturally,  Sir  Benjamin 
shrank  from  opposing  so  great  an  authority  in 
such  a  matter  ;  and  the  order  was  in  consequence 

The  question  as  to  the  obligation  of  the  Lord's 
Day  as  a  Sabbath  was  before  the  religious  public 
at  the  time  whereof  we  speak  in  other  connections 
as  well.  And  a  strong  Sabbatarian  line  was  taken 
up  by  the  Record  newspaper.  The  Record  had 
now  been  in  existence  nearly  thirty  years  ;  and  it 
was  the  one  Low-Church  newspaper,  as  the  Chris- 
tian Observer  was  the  one  Low-Church  magazine. 
And  as  a  magazine  shows  more  than  anything  else 
what  is  the  hterary  abihty  of  those  whose  party  it 
represents,  so  a  newspaper  may  fairly  be  taken  as 
an  exponent  of  general  character.  And  it  shows 
this  in  those  of  its  columns  more  especially  which, 
are  devoted  to  letters  from  correspondents;  for 
there  the  writers  can  show  what  is  in  their  hearts 
under  cover  of  signatures  concealing  their  identity. 
Now  the  Record  had  for  some  time  past  been  afford- 
ing in  this  way  a  very  sad  evidence  of  that  spiritual 
decline  which  had  been  going  on  in  the  Low- 
Church  party  almost  from  its  very  commencement. 
Archbishop  Sumner  described  the  temper  and  lan- 
guage of  the  paper  as  "  execrable  ;  "  and  the  Eev. 
Henry  Alford,  then  minister  of  Quebec  Chapel, 
London,  had  soon  occasion  to  write  thus  :  "  The 

38  THE    RECORD    AND    MK.    ALFORD. 

bold,  large-print   lie,  followed  by  the  insufficient 
small-print  apology,  which  is  again  neutralised  by 
the  subsequently  repeated  lie."     Mr.   Alford  was 
in  the  main  a  decided  Low-Churchman  ;  but  his 
mind  was   larger  and  more  independent  than  the 
minds  of  most  other  Low-Churchmen.     And  in  the 
present  case,  having,  along  with  another  clergy- 
man, stood  up  publicly  to  claim  the  exercise  of 
Christian  liberty  for  himself  and  his  fellow-Chris- 
tians in  regard  of  the  Lord's  Day,  denying  that  it 
was  identical  in  any  sense  with  the  Jewish  Sabbath, 
he  was  violently  abused  by  the  Record,  in  a  series 
of  articles  the  object  of  w^hich  was  to  write  him 
down.     The  intelligent  Churchman  will  not  need 
to  be  told  that  in  this  matter  Mr.  Alford  had  the 
mind  of  the  Church  of  England  with  him,  as  ex- 
pressed in  the  book  which  has  most  authority  as 
an  exponent  of  her  mind  :  for  in  that  exposition  of 
the  Decalogue  which  is  given  in  the  Catechism, 
after  speaking  about  the  duty  of  honouring  God's 
Holy  Name,  and  His  Word,  nothing  at  all  is  said 
about  honouring  any  particular  day  ;  but  the  answer 
proceeds — "  To  serve  Him  truly  all  the  days  of  my 
life."     Mr.  Alford,  however,  was  charged,  in  the 
Christian  newspaper  above  named,  with  disingenu- 
ousness  in  reading  the  Fourth  Commandment  in 
the  Communion-service,  and  was  pronounced  unfit 
to  remain  in  the  Church  of  England.     To  this  he 
replied,  in  the  second  of  Two  Letters  to  J.  Sperling, 
Esq.,  saying,  "  If  I  were  disposed  to  turn  the  tables 
.   .  .  might  I  not  fairly  say,  to  which  of  the  two 
does  the  charge  most  properly  apply — to  myself, 
who,  regarding  the  commandment  as  not  binding- 


in  its  literal  sense,  read  it  as  interpreted  by  the 
Gospel  and  the  Church ;  or  to  them,  who,  regard- 
ing it  as  strictly  and  literally  obligatory  on  them, 
obey  its  command  to  observe  one  prescribed  day, 
for  a  definite  assigned  reason,  and  in  a  strictly  speci- 
fied manner,  by  observing  another  day,  for  a  totally 
difierent  reason,  and  in  a  manner  entirely  their  own ; 
first  praying  that  they  may  keep  the  law,  then  ab- 
rogating every  word  of  it,  substituting  a  new  law 
of  their  own,  and  investins^  it  with  the  authoritv  of 
the  other  ?  "  This,  no  doubt,  was  what  a  Low- 
Church  writer — in  the  Record,  if  we  remember 
right — termed  "  concentrated  venom." 

Before  leaving  the  Sabbath  controversy,  we  may 
note  the  following  evidence  of  the  ignorance  of 
Scripture  among  Low-Churchmen  at  this  time, 
Li  the  very  first  article  in  the  Christian  Observer 
for  this  year,  entitled  The  Sabbath  was  made  for 
Man,  the  writer  spoke  of  the  Lord  as  winding  up 
"  His  argument  with  the  words,  '  The  Sabbath  was 
made  for  man,  and  not  man  for  the  Sabbath,  for  the 
Son  of  Man  is  Lord  even  of  the  Sabbath-day.' " 
After  such  a  gross  misquotation*  it  need  not  be 
added  that  nowhere  in  that  article  did  the  writer 
give  the  slightest  proof  that  he  had  himself  any 
notion  at  all  of  what  the  Lord's  argument  really 

About  the  same  time  some  scandal  was  given 
to  the  lovers  of  Church  order  by  the  conduct  of 
Dr.  Gobat,  the  Anglican  Bishop  in  Jerusalem.     The 

*  The  passage  of  St.  Mark  is :  "  And  He  said  nnto  them,  The 
Sabbath  was  made  for  man,  and  not  man  for  the  Sabbath  :  therefore 
the  Son  of  man  is  Lord  also  of  the  sabbath  "  (Mark  ii.  27,  28). 

40  BISHOP  gobat's  schismatical  conduct 

Scottish  Episcopal  Cliurch  had  found  less  favour 
in  Low-Church  eyes  in  proportion  as  its  principles 
became  known  and  were  asserted.     Low-Church- 
men had  a  quarrel  with  it  on  several  grounds. 
It  asserted  the  necessity  of  an  episcopate,  handed 
down  from  the  Apostles,  for  valid  ordinations :  it 
testified  ai^ainst  Calvinism  ;  and  it  testified  to  the 
truth  of  sacramental  grace  :  on  all  which  points 
Low-Churchmen  denied  the  truth.     We  have  seen 
before  how  Sir  William  Dunbar  and  Mr.  Drum- 
mond  had  violated  the  principles  of  Christian  unity 
by  seceding  from  the  communion  of  those  bishops 
to  whom  they  had  previously  given  in  their  sub- 
mission.    Bishop  Gobat  now,  being  in  Scotland, 
thought  proper  to  ignore  the  Episcopal  Church  of 
the  country,  and  to  preach  in  some  congregations 
which,  by  a  curious  inisnomer,  termed  themselves 
"  Enghsh  Episcopal."      Bishop  Skinner  of  Aber- 
deen wrote  thereupon  a  letter  of  protest  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  dated  June  28,  1856. 
Accidental  circumstances  hindered  the  Archbishop 
from  replying  immediately.     Then  the  Eev.  Joshua 
Kirkman,  minister  of  St.  Paul's,  Aberdeen,  wrote 
to  ask  his  Grace  what  notice  he  had  taken,  or  in- 
tended to  take,  of  Bishop  Skinner's  letter  :  adding, 
*'  If  only  our  identity  with  the  Cliurch  of  England, 
and  the  wide  separation  from  her  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  in  Scotland,  in  almost  every  part  of  her 
offices  and  constitution,  were  generally  known  in 
England,  we  should  not  be  so  isolated  as  we  are. 
Your  Grace's  character  is  one  of  those  supports 
we  always  remember  as  in  reserve,  and  ready  in 
time    of    need ;    and    therefore    I    trust   you    will 


favour  me  with  such  notice  as  you  may  think  may 
conduce  to  the  help  of  Evangelical  truth  and  feel- 
ing in  Scotland,  and  against  a  gratuitously  hostile 
Church  with  whom  we  are  forced  into  a  certain 
amount  of  collision."  In  replying  to  this,  the 
Archbishop  expressed  regret  at  the  unfavourable 
light  in  which  Bishop  Gobat's  conduct  was  seen 
by  the  Scottish  bishops,  as  if  Catholic  bishops 
could  have  seen  it  in  any  other  light;  and  his 
Grace  did  not  omit  to  give  the  Scottish  prelates 
an  indirect  snubbing,  by  adding :  "  I  was  much 
gratified  by  hearing  the  account  which  Bishop 
Gobat,  since  his  return,  has  given  me  of  the  state 
in  which  he  found  your  Church  and  congrega- 
tion, and  of  his  success  both  at  Aberdeen  and 

The  Archbishop  had,  this  same  year  (1856),  the 
opportunity  of  manifesting  his  care  for  Low-Church 
interests  in  another  way.  Dr.  Armstrong,  the  first 
Bishop  of  Grahamstown,  in  South  Africa,  had  de- 
parted this  life.  The  Diocese  of  Grahamstown  was 
one  in  the  foundation  of  which  few  Low-Churchmen, 
if  any,  had  helped ;  but  a  powerful  effort  was  now 
made  by  Low-Churchmen  to  get  one  of  their  party 
appointed  to  preside  over  it  in  Bishop  Armstrong's 
place,  and  so  to  neutralise  the  work  which  he,  follow- 
ing Bishop  Gray  of  Capetown,  out  of  whose  diocese 
that  of  Grahamstown  had  been  taken,  had  been  doing 
on  Church  lines.  The  result  was,  that  on  Archbishop 
Sumner's  recommendation  the  Eev.  Henry  Cotterill, 
Principal  of  Brighton  College,  then  a  distinctly 
Low-Church  institution,  received  the  appointment. 
How  Bishop  Cotterill  attempted  to  work  the  diocese 


on  Low-Church  lines,  how  he  found  that  on  those 
lines  it  could  not  be  worked  at  all,  and  how  he 
learned  by  experience  to  become  a  decent  Church- 
man, and  a  warm  supporter  of  his  metropolitan. 
Bishop  Gray,  belongs  rather  to  the  history  of  the 
Anglican  Communion  in  South  Africa  than  to  the 
history  of  a  party  in  England.  We  allude  to  the 
matter  here  as  showing  an  instance  of  Low-Church 
zeal,  which  was  not  the  less  for  beinor  doomed  to 

The  year  1856  was  signalised  as  being  that  in 
which  the  Theological  College  of  St.  Aidan,  Birken- 
head, was  opened,  for  preparing  candidates  for  the 
ministry  of  the  Church  of  England.  The  institu- 
tion had  originated  in  a  private  theological  class 
commenced,  under  the  sanction  of  the  Bishop  of 
Chester  (Dr.  John  Bird  Sumner,  afterwards  arch- 
bishop), by  the  Eev.  Joseph  Baylee,  afterwards 
D.r>.  The  teaching  was,  as  might  have  been 
expected,  of  a  Low-Church  character ;  but  the 
college  was  not  constituted  on  party  lines.  The 
bishop  of  the  diocese  was  Visitor  ;  and  the  only 
steps  taken,  apparently,  for  giving  a  Low-Church 
bias  to  the  constitution  were  to  make  the  Bishop  of 
Liverpool  another  Visitor  when  the  new  Diocese  of 
Liverpool  had  been  formed  and  placed  under  the 
rule  of  Dr.  Eyle,  and  to  give  certain  officials  of 
the  new  diocese  shares  in  the  government.  For 
the  Council  consisted  of  the  Dean  of  Chester  (at 
the  time  of  our  writing  Liverpool  had  no  cathedral 
establishment  under  a  dean) ;  the  Archdeacons  of 
Chester,  Macclesfield,  Liverpool,  and  Warrington ; 
the    Chancellors  of  the   Dioceses  of  Chester  and 

DE.    BAYLEE.  4a 

Liverpool;  the  Proctors  in  Convocation  for  both 
dioceses,  and  two  examining  chaplains  appointed  by 
the  two  bishops  severally.  These  were  all  ex-officio 
members  ;  and  with  them  were  associated  eighteen 
laymen,  elected  by  the  Diocesan  Conferences,  four 
of  whom  went  out  yearly  in  rotation,  though  they 
could  be  re-elected.  The  course  of  study  included 
the  Old  Testament  in  English,  the  JSTew  Testament 
in  Greek,  Ecclesiastical  History,  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles,  and  the  Prayer-book.  There  were  lec- 
tures, moreover,  on  preaching  and  other  ministerial 
work,  and  the  students  were  practised  in  English 
composition  and  Latin.  Hebrew  also  formed  one 
of  the  subjects  of  study,  though  not  an  indispen- 
sable one.  The  principal  agent  in  the  foundation 
of  the  College  was  Dr.  Baylee,  who  became  its  first 


Prosecution  of  Archdeacon  Denison.  New  Society  for  maintaining 
Low-Church  Principles.  Puiotous  Conduct  at  a  Sister's  FuneraU 
Privy  Council  Judgment  about  the  Knightsbridge  Churches. 

The  Low-Church  party  had  gained  a  legal  victory 
in  the  result  of  the  Gorliam  case.  They  were  now 
to  gain  another  victory  ;  and  a  moral  one  this 
time,  though  not  a  legal  one.  The  Judicial  Com- 
mittee of  Privy  Council  had,  at  their  instance,  de- 
clared certain  heresies  to  be  not  inconsistent  with 
Anglican  formularies,  although  the  chief  of  those 
formularies  contradicted  the  heresies  in  the  most 
express  terms.  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
was  now,  at  their  instance,  to  declare,  authorita- 


tively  and  ex  cathedra,  certain  Catholic  truths, 
which  were  necessarily  involved  in  the  terms  of 
Anglican  formularies,  to  be  inadmissible  in  Angli- 
can teaching. 

Archdeacon  Denison  writes  thus  in  the  Notes 
of  his  Life  :  "  I  was  present  with  my  dear  friend 
Lord  John  Thynne,  at  the  delivery  of  the  Gorham 
Judgment,  March  8,  1850.  As  we  came  down  the 
steps  of  the  Council  Office  I  said  to  him,  '  Well, 
what  do  you  think  will  come  next  ? ' 

"  He  said,  '  I  suppose  you  mean  something 
about  the  other  sacrament  ? ' 

"  '  Yes,'  I  said,  '  and  it  will  come  very  soon  ! '  I 
did  not  think,  when  I  said  it,  that  it  would  come 
in  my  own  person  within  four  years  from  that 

The  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells  at  this  time  was 
Dr.  Eichard  Bagot.  He  had  been  translated  from 
Oxford,  where  he  had  given  the  Tractarian  move- 
ment some  encouragement ;  and  on  his  accession 
to  the  See  of  Bath  and  Wells  he  had  made  the  Eev. 
George  Anthony  Denison,  who  was  already  Yicar 
of  East  Brent  in  that  diocese,  his  examining  chap- 
lain, and  subsequently  Archdeacon  of  Taunton. 
The  infirmities  of  age  were  now  upon  the  Bishop  ; 
and  he  had  been  in  consequence  obliged  to  delegate 
the  ministerial  act  of  ordination  to  another  bishop. 
Dr.  G.  T.  Spencer,  formerly  Bishop  of  Madras, 
and  a  Low-Churchman.  This  prelate  imagined 
that  he  had  the  responsibility  of  examining  candi- 
dates, instead  of  simply  ordaining  those  who  were 
presented  to  him  by  the  examining  chaplain,  and 

*   Notes  of  my  Life,  p.  190. 


none  others ;  and  tlius  was  generated  some  dis- 
agreement between  Archdeacon  Denison  and  his 
diocesan  as  to  the  necessity  of  imposing  an  accept- 
ance of  the  Cathohc  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist  (which 
both  Bishop  and  Archdeacon  beheved  to  be  true 
in  itself)  as  a  sine  qua  non  for  ordination.  This  the 
Archdeacon  had  done  and  insisted  on  doincr,  in 
spite  of  Bishop  Spencer's  opposition.  Bishop  Bagot 
thought  that  the  doctrine  in  question  should  not 
be  imposed  on  candidates  for  Holy  Orders  as 
the  Archdeacon  had  imposed  it :  and  on  this 
account  the  Archdeacon  resigned  the  office  of 
examining  chaplain.  He  deemed  it  right,  how- 
ever, to  preach  three  sermons  in  Wells  Cathedral, 
in  which  he  maintained  the  following  Catholic 
truths  : — • 

"  I.  That  the  bread  and  wine  become,  by  the 
act  of  consecration,  the  outward  part  or  sign  of 
the  Lord's  Supper ;  and,  considered  as  objects  of 
sense,  are  unchanged  by  the  act  of  consecration, 
'  remaining  still  in  their  very  natural  substances.' 

"  n.  That  '  the  Inward  Part,  or  Thing  signified ' 
is  '  the  Body  and  the  Blood  of  Christ.'  " 

"  m.  That  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ,  being 
present  naturally  in  heaven,  are  supernaturally  and 
invisibly,  but  really,  present  in  the  Lord's  Supper, 
through  the  elements,  by  virtue  of  the  act  of 

"  IV.  That  by  '  the  Eeal  Presence  of  the  Body 
and  the  Blood  of  Christ  in  the  Lord's  Supper ' 
is  not  to  be  understood  the  presence  of  an  influence 
emanating  from  a  thing  absent,  but  the  supernatural 
and  invisible  presence  of  a  thing  present ;   of  His 


Very  Body  and  Very  Blood,  present  '  under  the 
form  of  Bread  and  Wine.' 

"  V.  That  '  the  outward  part,  or  sign,'  and  '  the 
Inward  Part,  or  Thing  signified,'  being  brought  to- 
gether in  and  by  the  act  of  consecration,  make  the 

"VI.  That  the  sacrament — i.e.  '  the  outward 
part  or  sign,'  and  '  the  Inward  Part,  or  Thing  signi- 
fied ' — is  given  to,  and  is  received  by,  all  who  com- 

"  VII.  That  in  '  such  only  as  worthily  receive  the 
same  (the  sacraments  of  the  Body  and  the  Blood  of 
Christ),  they  have  a  wholesome  effect  or  operation  ; 
but  they  that  receive  them  unworthily  purchase 
to  themselves  damnation,  as  St.  Paul  saith.' 

"  VIII.  That  worship  is  due  to  '  the  Body  and 
Blood  of  Christ,'  supernaturally  and  invisibly,  but 
*  really,  present  in  the  Lord's  Supper '  under  the 
form  of  Bread  and  Wine,'  by  reason  of  that  God- 
head with  which  they  are  personally  united.  But 
that  the  elements  through  which  '  the  Body  and 
the  Blood  of  Christ  are  given  and  received  may 
not  be  worshipped.'  "  *  (Where  the  Archdeacon 
•spoke  of  worship  being  due  to  the  Lord's  Body 
and  Blood,  we  presume  that  he  meant  due  to 
the  Lord's  Person,  really  present  in  the  sacrament 
by  virtue  of  consecration :  as  otherwise  he  would 
have  laid  himself  open  to  the  charge  of  Nestori- 

The  three  sermons  embodying  the  above  doctrine 
were  preached  August  7th,  1853,  November  6th, 
1853,  and  May  15th,  1854.   On  the  16th  of  January, 

*  Notes  of  my  Life,  pp.  234-5. 


1854,  the  Eev.  Joseph  Ditcher,  Vicar  of  South  Brent, 
wrote  to  the  Archdeacon  asking  him  to  retract : 
which  the  Archdeacon  immediately  dechned  to  do. 
Thereupon  a  prosecution  was  got  up  b}^  the  leaders 
of  a  society  which  Archdeacon  Denison,  in  his  Notes 
of  his  Life,  calls  the  "  Evangelical  Alliance,"  but 
which  probably  was  not  the  same  as  that  the  origin 
of  which  we  have  recorded,  and  of  which  Mr, 
Bickersteth  was  one  of  the  most  active  promoters. 
The  society  which  prosecuted  Archdeacon  Denison 
numbered  among  its  principal  members  the  Earl  of 
Shaftesbury,  Mr.  A.  Kinnaird,  Mr.  C.  L.  Bevan,  and 
Mr.  Wilbraham  Taylor.  The  intermediate  mover 
was  Archdeacon  Law  of  Wells,  then  Rector  of 
Weston-super-Mare,  and  since  made  Dean  of  Glou- 
cester. The  ostensible  mover  was  his  official,  Mr. 
Ditcher,  just  mentioned.*  This  Mr.  Ditcher  laid,  in 
due  course,  a  presentment  before  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  praying  for  an  inquiry.  This  was 
granted  ;  and  five  clergymen  of  the  Diocese  of  Bath 
and  Wells  were  nominated  by  the  Archbishop  to 
inquire  whether  there  was  prima  facie  o-round  for 
further  proceedings.  The  clergy  who  formed  this 
commission  were  got  together  with  extreme  diffi- 
culty, and  after  many  failures.  They  were,  the  Eicrht 
Eev.  Thomas  Carr,  Eector  of  Bath,  and  formerly 
Bishop  of  Bombay;  the  Eev.  Charles  Langdon, 
Vicar  of  Queen's  Camel ;  the  Eev.  Eeginald  Pole, 
Eector  of  Yeovilton  ;  the  Eev.  E.  C.  Phelips,  Eector 
ofCucklington;  andtheBev.  C.  0.  Mayne,  Vicar  of 
Midsomer  Norton.  These  met  at  Clevedon,  and  in 
January  1855  declared  their  unanimous  opinion  to 

*  Notes  of  my  Life,  p.  222 


be  that  there  was  fwima  facie  ground  for  further 
proceedings  against  Archdeacon  Denison. 

Meanwhile  Bishop  Bagot  had  died,  and  been 
succeeded  by  Lord  Auckland,  who  came  from  the 
See  of  Sodor  and  Man.  The  new  diocesan,  how- 
ever, was  disposed  to  support  Archdeacon  Denison, 
against  whom  the  proceedings  .  were  continued  ; 
Mr.  Ditcher  being  supported,  as  we  are  assured 
by  the  Editor  of  the  Christian  Observer,  "  by  the 
contributions  of  the  really  Protestant  members  of 
the  Church,  and  the  approbation  of  the  whole 
Evangelical  party."  * 

The  reason  why  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
rather  than  the  Bishop  of  the  diocese  had  been 
moved  to  act  in  this  case  was,  that  both  the  living 
of  East  Brent  and  the  Archdeaconry  of  Taunton 
were  in  the  Bishop's  gift ;  who  might  therefore  be 
deemed  a  partial  judge  in  proceedings  against  the 
clerk  of  his  appointment.  And  in  consequence  of 
the  conclusion  at  which  the  Clevedon  commissioners 
had  arrived,  the  Archbishop,  acting  for  the  time  as 
bishop  of  the  diocese,  held  a  court  at  Bath,  July 
22nd,  1856,  being  assisted  by  three  assessors,  viz. : 
the  Eight  Hon.  Stephen  Lushington,  LL.D. ;  the 
Very  Eev.  George  Henry  Sacheverell  Johnson, 
Dean  of  Wells  ;  and  the  Eev.  Charles  Abel  Heartley, 
D.D.,  Margaret  Professor  of  Divinity  in  the  Univer- 
sity of  Oxford.  In  the  course  of  the  proceedings, 
Archdeacon  Denison  wished  to  show  from  Scrip- 
ture and  from  antiquity  that  his  interpretation  of 
the  Articles  on  the  Sacraments  was  the  true  one. 
This,  however,  the  court  refused  to  allow ;  and  the 

Christian  Observer  for  18G1,  p.  29!i 


Archbishop  pronounced  that  the  Archdeacon  had 
contravened  certain  articles  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land. The  Archdeacon  was  offered  ten  minutes 
for  recantation.  At  the  suggestion  of  a  friend  he 
accepted  the  offer,  and  employed  the  time  in  sub- 
stituting for  his  own  words  a  passage  from  Bishop 
Andrewes.  As  soon  as  this  passage  was  read  by 
counsel  it  was  condemned  as  being,  not  a  retrac- 
tation, but  a  reiteration  of  the  offence  charged. 
Thereupon  the  Ai-chdeacon  was  allowed  to  the 
1st  of  the  October  following  for  recantation.  He 
appealed  to  the  Court  of  the  Province  ;  and  Sir 
John  Dodson,  then  Dean  of  Arches,  decided  that  Mr. 
Ditcher's  suit  must  be  dismissed,  not  having  been 
commenced  within  the  time  (two  years)  prescribed 
by  the  Church  Discipline  Act.*  ]\ir.  Ditcher  then 
appealed  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council, 
and  that  court  confirmed  the  decision  of  the  Dean 
of  Arches  on  the  6th  of  February,  1858.f 

Before  we  leave  speaking  of  the  year  1857  we 
must  note  the  formation,  in  it,  of  "  The  Church 
of  England  Clerical  and  Lay  Association  for  the 
Maintenance  of  Evangelical  Principles."  This  as- 
sociation seems  to  have  been  formed  on  a  plan 
to  which  no  objection  could  be  made  on  general 
Christian  principles.  Its  members  proposed  to 
avoid  unnecessary  interference  with  other  parties, 
or  the  adoption  of  any  course  which  might  tend  to 
rouse  or  to  cherish  a  spirit  of  hostility  or  conten- 
tion.;]^     How  long  it  continued  in  existence  we  do 

*  Letter  from  Dr.  Walter  Phillimore  to  the   Times,  reprinted 
in  the  Church  Times  of  November  30,  1877. 
t  Notes  of  my  Life,  p.  241. 
X  Christian  Observer  for  1861,  p.  685. 

n.  5 

50  MOBBING   A   sister's   FUNERAL. 

not  know :  but  we  fear  that  the  period  was  not  a 
long  one. 

A  very  different  spirit  showed  itself  towards  the 
end  of  the  year  at  Lewes,  in  Sussex.  The  com- 
mencement of  Anglican  Sisterhoods  by  Miss  Sellon 
had  aroused  the  antagonism  of  the  more  religious 
part  of  Anglican  Protestantism,  as  we  have  seen. 
The  funeral  of  a  Miss  Scobell,  a  member  of  another 
Anghcan  Sisterhood,  gave  occasion  for  an  outburst 
of  antagonism  on  the  part  of  the  uneducated  rabble. 
It  was  with  great  difficulty  that  the  funeral  proces- 
sion was  able  to  proceed  ;  the  Sisters  composing  it 
were  assaulted  by  the  mob.  The  riot  was  caused 
by  Miss  Scobell's  father,  who  circulated  a  story 
about  his  daughter's  having  been  first  inveigled 
into  the  Sisterhood,  then  persuaded  to  make  a  will 
in  favour  of  the  Sisterhood,  and  afterwards  delibe- 
rately exposed  to  infectious  disease  in  order  that 
she  might  die,  and  that  the  Sisters  of  the  society 
might  succeed  to  her  fortune ;  the  fact  being  that 
Miss  Scobell,  who,  when  she  joined  the  Sisterhood, 
was  more  than  thirty  years  of  age,  had  left  the 
bulk  of  her  property  to  her  brother. 

Next,  however,  to  the  prosecution  of  Archdeacon 
Denison,  the  year  1857  was  chiefly  remarkable  for 
the  judgment  given  by  the  Judicial  Committee  of 
Privy  Council  in  the  matter  of  certain  articles 
of  church  furniture  in  St.  Paul's,  Knightsbridge, 
and  St.  Barnabas's,  Pimlico.  The  former  of  these 
churches  had  been  consecrated  by  the  Bishop  of 
London  (Dr.  Blomfield)  on  the  30th  of  May,  1843. 
The  furniture  of  it  included  on  that  day  a  wooden 
altar  with  re-table,  various  coloured  cloths  for  the 


same,  a  wooden  cross,  and  a  pair  of  gilt  candle- 
sticks ;    also  a  credence.     In  the  year  1855  JMr. 
Westerton,  one  of  the  churchwardens,  instituted  a 
suit  in  the  Consistory  Court  of  London  against  his 
colleague  Mr.  Home,  and  the  incumbent,  the  Hon. 
and  Eev.  Eobert  Liddell,  to  obtain  the  removal  of 
those  things.     In  the  course  of  this  suit  persons 
of  rank  had  joined  with  tradesmen   in  swearing 
that  they  were  precluded  from  attending  St.  Paul's 
Church  in  consequence  of  their  conscientious  ob- 
jections to  the  several  articles  of  furniture  whereof 
complaint   had   been  made :    thus  reminding   the 
student  of  history  how  when  Laud  had  been  made 
Dean  of  Gloucester,  and  had,  with  the  consent  of 
the    Chapter,   given   directions    for  removing  the 
altar  from  the  middle  of  the  choir  to  the  eastern 
wall,  the  Bishop   (Dr.  Miles  Smith,  an  inflexible 
Calvinist)   vowed    never    to    enter    the    cathedral 
again  if  the   new  Dean  persisted  in    the   course 
which  he  had  begun :  a  vow  which,  it  is  said,  he 
kept.     St.  Barnabas's  Church  was  a  chapel-of-ease 
to  St.  Paul's,  and  was  served  by  curates  under  Mr. 
Liddell.     This  church  had  in  it  a  fixed  stone  altar, 
with  various  coloured  cloths,  a  marble  credence,  and 
a  jewelled  cross  fixed  to  the  re-table,  which  re-table 
was  itself  a  part  of  the  altar.     It  had  also  a  pair 
of  movable  candlesticks,  a  rood-screen  with  brazen 
gates    and  a  cross    above,   besides  various  cloths 
ornamented  with  lace  and  otherwise.     In  or  about 
the  year  1854   a  Mr.  Beal,  an  inhabitant  of  the 
district  of  St.  Barnabas,  had  instituted  a  suit  in  the 
Consistory  Court   of  London  for  the  removal  of 
these  articles  of  furniture.     The  judge  (Dr.  Lush- 



ington)  deemed  the  altar  and  candlesticks  at  St. 
Paul's  to  be  legal,  but  condemned  as  illegal  tbe 
credence,  the  cross,  and  the  coloured  cloths.  In 
the  case  of  St.  Barnabas's,  he  condemned  all  the 
things  whereof  complaint  had  been  made.  And 
on  the  17tli  of  January,  1856,  he  issued  a  monition 
against  Mr.  Liddell  and  the  two  churchwardens  of 
St.  Barnabas's,  ordering  the  removal  of  all  those 
things  deemed  illes;al.  Costs  were  not  allowed 
in  either  case.  Dr.  Lushington  declaring  that  he 
would  not  allow  a  party  triumph. 

Against  these  judgments  appeal  was  brought  to 
the  Court  of  Arches,  except  as  to  the  brazen  gates 
of  the  screen,  the  candlesticks,  and  the  candles  ;  and 
with  these  exceptions  Sir  John  Dodson  affirmed  the 
judgments  of  Dr.  Lushington  in  all  respects,  and 
condemned  the  appellants  in  the  costs  of  their 
appeal.  This  was  in  December  1856.  Further 
appeal  was  then  made  to  the  Judicial  Committee 
of  Privy  Council ;  and  this  court  decided,  March 
21,  1857,  that  the  cross  over  the  rood-screen  at  St. 
Barnabas's  was  legal ;  that  the  stone  altar  with  its 
fixed  cross  was  illegal ;  that  the  credence  was 
legal ;  that  the  coloured  cloths  for  the  altar  were 
legal ;  but  that  the  embroidery  on  the  linen  was 
illegal.  The  lords  present  at  the  delivery  of  the 
judgment  were  Lord  Wensleydale,  Mr.  Pemberton 
Leigh,  Sir  John  Patteson,  Sir  W.  H.  Maule,  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (Dr.  Sumner),  and  the 
Bishop  of  London  (Dr.  Blomfield).  Both  prelates, 
it  was  stated,  concurred  in  it. 

In  this  judgment  their  Lordships  showed  how 
much  knowledge  they  had  of  the  subjects  before 


them  by  declaring  that  in  the  second  Prayer-book 
of  King  Edward  VI.  "  the  prayer  for  consecration 
of  the  elements  was  omitted,  though  in  the  present 
Prayer-book  it  is  restored ! "  In  the  authorised 
report,  edited  by  Mr.  E.  F.  Moore,  this  sentence 
was  untruthfully  altered  to  the  following  : — "  ma- 
terial alterations  were  introduced  in  the  prayer  of 
consecration."  The  fact  is  that  the  prayer  itself 
was  identical  with  the  one  in  use  at  present,  save 
in  the  following  points :  "  which  "  where  we  now 
have  "  who  ;  "  "  we  beseech  Thee  "  where  we  now 
have  "  we  most  humbly  beseech  Thee ; "  and 
"  Jesu  "  where  we  now  have  "  Jesus." 

The  Christian  Observer^  wliich  had  given  the 
name  of  "  fantastic  absurdities "  to  the  several 
articles  of  church-furniture  under  question,  and 
which  had  said,  with  characteristic  nonsense,  that 
it  had  "  been  attempted  to  graft "  them  "  on  the 
stock  of  simple  Protestant  worship,"  now  remarked: 
"  It  is  well  that  some  settlement  of  these  vexatious 
questions  should  be  obtained,  and  we  see  nothing 
to  dispute  in  the  present  decision.  Neither  can 
we  see  that  Protestantism  will  suffer  the  slightest 
injury  from  a  rose-coloured  communion  coverlid, 
or  an  ornamented  credence-table,  if  people  are  so 
childish  as  to  introduce  them."  Thus  the  Editor 
would  fain  make  the  best  of  what  to  Low-Church- 
men was  really  a  bad  business. 

54  REV.    C.    H.    SPUKGEON. 


Polemical  Period,  continued.  Movement  for  Extra  Preaching. 
Opening  of  Exeter  Hall  on  Sunday  Evenings.  Opening  of  St. 
Paul's  and  Westminster  Abbey  for  Evening  Services  and  Sermons. 
Special  Services  Aid  Society.  "Church  Missionary  Society" 
helps  to  increase  the  Episcopate.  Fraternising  with  Dissent. 
Dean  Alford  and  the  "  EvangeUcal  Alliance  "  at  Berhn.  Turkish 
Missions  Aid  Society. 

It  is  comforting  to  turn  from  the  narrcative  of  Low- 
Churcli  zeal  against  Catholic  usages  and  Catholic 
symbols,  and  to  record  efforts  made  by  the  Low- 
Church  party  in  the  interests  of  positive  personal 
religion.  Such  efforts  were  made  in  the  year  1857  ; 
efforts  to  spread  religion  among  the  working 
classes  by  means  of  more  popular  preaching  than 
had  hitherto  been  in  general  use. 

In  this  they  were  provoked  to  jealousy  by  Dis- 
senters. The  Eev.  C.  H.  Spurgeon,  a  preacher  of 
the  Anabaptist  denomination,  who  was  born  in  the 
year  1834,  had  begun  to  preach  when  only  nine- 
teen years  of  age,  to  a  little  congregation  at  Water- 
beach,  in  Cambridgeshire.  While  thus  employed, 
he  had  achieved  for  himself  such  a  reputation 
as  a  preacher  that  he  received  what  was  termed  a 
"  call "  to  fix  himself  in  Southwark.  And  there, 
in  May  1861,  he  opened  his  "  Tabernacle,"  a  build- 
ing capable  of  accommodating  six  thousand 
hearers,  and  has  kept  the  institution  going,  and 
with  it  an  orphanage  for  four  hundred  children, 
and  a  "  Pastors'  College  "  (as  it  is  termed),  which, 
in  the  nineteen  years  subsequent  to  its  opening 
in  1865,  turned  out  six  hundred  preachers,    five 


hundred  of  whom  served  congregations  at  home, 
and  the  rest  went  abroad.  To  this  remarkable 
man,  or  rather  to  his  remarkable  popularity,  the 
Church  of  England  owes  indirectly  a  reform  in 
certain  details  of  her  practice.  We  allude  to  the 
opening  of  certain  cathedrals  and  other  large 
churches  for  popular  preaching  and  popular  ser- 
vices. The  Church  was  provoked  to  jealousy  by 
the  success  which  Mr.  Spurgeon  had  attained  at 
the  period  of  which  we  write,  though  his  "  Taber- 
nacle "  was  not  then  built.  And  the  Low-Church 
party  commenced  action  by  organising  public 
preachings  at  Exeter  Hall  on  Sunday  evenings. 
This  was  in  the  year  1857,  in  the  end  of  May  or 
besfinning;  of  June. 

An  obstacle  was  interposed  by  the  Eev.  A.  Gr. 
Edouart,  Incumbent  of  St.  Michael's,  Burleigh 
Street,  in  which  parish  Exeter  Hall  is  situated  ;  he 
refused  to  allow  any  such  proceedings  to  be  carried 
on  in  his  parish  by  clergymen  of  the  Church  of 
England.  The  Earl  of  Shaftesbury,  however,  got 
an  Act  of  Parliament  passed  whereby  such  obstacles 
could  be  removed  in  certain  cases,  and  under  this 
Act  Exeter  Hall  was  opened  for  public  preaching 
by  clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England  on  Sunday 
evenings.  The  order  of  proceeding  was,  first  a 
hymn,  then  the  Litany,  then  another  hymn,  and 
afterwards  the  sermon.  The  clergymen  who  offici- 
ated were  appointed  by  the  committee,  who  paid 
their  travelling  expenses  ;  in  other  respects  their 
labour  was  gratuitous.  The  preaching  was  well 
attended ;  but  unfortunately  the  committee  and 
other  persons  who  occupied  the  platform  behind 


the  preacher  set  an  example  of  irreverence  by 
sitting  while  the  Litany  was  being  recited.* 

These  preachings,  however,  conld  not  be  kept 
up  always,  and  then  Dissenting  preachers  found 
their  way  to  the  platform  of  Exeter  Hall  as  well 
as  clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England.  But  the 
movement  led  to  the  commencement  of  "  special 
services  "  (as  they  were  called)  both  in  St.  Paul's 
Cathedral  and  at  Westminster  Abbey  ;  Evening 
Prayer  being  sung  by  volunteer  choirs,  and  sermons 
delivered  by  specially  appointed  preachers.  In  St. 
Paul's  these  services  were  commenced  on  Advent 
Sunday,  1858,  and  continued  for  three  months  in 
each  year,  commencing  at  the  same  season  till  1873, 
and  since  then  on  every  Sunday  evening  throughout 
the  year.  In  Westminster  Abbey  there  had  been 
special  evening  services  in  1851,  for  the  benefit  of 
the  strangers  who  visited  the  Great  Exhibition  in 
that  year,  and  in  1858  they  were  resumed,  and 
they  were  carried  on  in  each  successive  year,  from 
the  first  Sunday  after  Easter  until  the  end  of  July. 
A  further  increase  has  since  taken  place,  special 
services  now  being  held  on  Sunday  evenings  in 
Advent  and  Lent  as  well. 

The  preaching  movement  took  a  further  de- 
velopment within  the  Low-Church  party,  in  the 
formation  of  the  "  Church  Home  Mission,  or  Special 
Services  Aid  Society,"  the  character  and  operations 
of  which  are  thus  described  in  the  Christian  Ob- 
server : — "  A    committee    was    formed    in    London 

*  "  Only  three  or  four  of  those  who  sat  even  in  the  front  row, 
■with  the  officiating  minister,  set  the  example  of  kneeling  ;  and  some 
close  to  him  sat  with  their  legs  crossed." — English  Churcliman, 
cited  in  the  Guardian  for  June  24,  1857,  p.  488. 


of    clergymen    and   laymen,    with    corresponding 
members,  all  of  known  Evangelical  principles,  in 
the  country.     A  resolution  was  taken  to  employ  as 
preachers  those  only  of  distinctly  Evangehcal  prin- 
ciples.    Beyond  their  expenses,  the  services  of  the 
preachers  are  gratuitous.      In  setting  to  work,  the 
committee  seek  out  parishes  where  the  respective 
incumbents  consent  to  a  short  service,  consisting 
in  general  of  the  Litany,  followed  by  a  sermon, 
the   whole  being   generally  concluded  within  an 
hour.      It  arranges  such  parishes  in  the  order  of 
circuits,  which  are  traversed  in  succession  by  the 
missionary  brethren  according  as  they  are  able  to 
redeem  time  for  the  work  from  their  own  labours 
at  home.  .  .   .  The  committee  approve  of  those  to 
be  invited,  and  then  communicate  with  them.   .   .  . 
There  are  now  "  [1859]  "  six  circuits  in  different 
parts  of  the  country — Surrey,  Sussex,  Herts,  Wilts 
and  Berks,  Staffordshire,  Worcestershire  and  Suf- 
folk ;    these    comprise   thirty-four    stations,  which 
are   visited   during   the  season  once  a  fortnight. 
They  have  an  average  attendance,  in  the  aggregate, 
of  from  14,000  to  15,000  people  of  all  classes;  and 
more   circuits  are  about   to   be  opened.  ...  As 
many  as  twelve  clergymen  have  been  observed  to 
be  present  on  one  occasion,  and  the  letters  from 
the  incumbents  in  whose  parishes  the  mission  is 
received  are  of  the  most  grateful  character;  while, 
as  to  the  people,  the  incidents  related  are  cheering 
and  significant  of  good.     Dissenters,  drawn  to  the 
parish  church,  express  their  wonderment  to  find 
such  preaching  in  the  Church  of  England."  * 

*   Christian  Observer  for  1859,  p.  795. 


About  this  time  the  "  Church  Missionary  Society" 
seems  to  have  received  some  new  hght  as  to  the 
desirableness  of  estabHshing  bishoprics  for  the  su- 
perintendence of  congregations  gathered  through 
the  laljours  of  their  missionaries.  The  Society 
had,  indeed,  not  refused  to  employ  its  influence  in 
promoting  the  establishment  of  episcoj^al  sees  in 
countries  more  or  less  heathen  ;  the  bishoprics  of 
Calcutta,  Madras,  and  Bombay,  the  first  occupants 
whereof  were  consecrated  in  1814,  1835,  and  1837 
severally,  had  been  founded  partly  or  wholly  at 
the  instance  of  the  Society,  though  not  supported 
by  it.  And  so  also  the  bishoprics  of  Sierra  Leone 
in  Africa,  Victoria  in  China,  and  Auckland,  origi- 
nally called  JSTew  Zealand  ;  the  latter  of  which, 
however,  was  partially  supported  by  the  "  Church 
Missionary  Society  "  for  many  years.  It  was,  how- 
ever, in  1858  that  the  first  episcopal  see  was  esta- 
blished the  occupant  of  which  was  to  be  supported 
by  the  Society  altogether  ;  that  see  was  Waiapu 
in  New  Zealand.  The  see,  also,  of  Wellington  in 
the  same  country,  which  received  its  first  bishop 
in  this  same  year,  was  both  founded  partly  at  the 
instance  of  the  Society,  and  also  supported  in  part 
out  of  the  Society's  funds.  And  in  subsequent 
years  bishops  were  consecrated  for  Moosonee  and 
Athabasca  in  North  America  (the  latter  of  which 
two  sees  was  since  called  Mackenzie  Eiver) ;  Tin- 
nevelly  in  India,  the  bishop  whereof  was  to  serve 
as  a  suffragan  to  the  Bishop  of  Madras  ;  Travancore 
and  Cochin,  Caledonia  in  North  America,  North 
China,  Mid  China,  and  Eastern  Equatorial  Africa ; 
all  deriving  their  official  incomes  from  the  "  Church 


Missionary  Society."  Wlicatever  objections  the  So- 
ciety may  have  entertained  to  the  estabhshing  of 
bishoprics  abroad  were  obviated  in  these  cases,  for 
those  clergymen  who  were  consecrated  to  fill  the 
new  sees  had  been  all,  or  almost  all,  in  the  Society's 
employ  already,  and  might  then  be  expected  to  let 
their  dioceses  be  ruled  by  the  Home  Committee  in 
all  matters  in  which  that  committee  cared  to  rule, 
instead  of  asserting  their  spiritual  authority  when 
they  deemed  needful  in  opposition  to  the  Society, 
as  was  done  by  Bishop  Wilson  of  Calcutta,  and 
still  later  by  Bishop  Jermyn  of  Colombo.  But  how 
Uttle  the  "  Church  Missionary  Society  "  knew,  at  an 
earher  time,  of  the  spiritual  benefits  to  be  derived 
through  organisation  under  bishops  appears  from 
a  passage  in  a  report  of  their  Calcutta  auxiliary 
association,  which  the  Home  Committee  appears 
to  have  practically  endorsed  : — "  The  committee 
cannot  refrain  from  congratulating  their  friends  on 
the  accession  to  their  numbers  of  the  Eight  Eev. 
the  Bishop  of  Calcutta.  Conformed  as  the^ir  pro- 
ceedings had  always  been  to  the  usage  of  the 
ancient  societies  of  the  Established  Church,  they 
could  not  but  desire  the  official  countenance  of 
their  Bishop.  They  have  now  that  privilege,  which, 
from  the  personal  attention  paid  by  his  Lordship  to 
the  interests  of  the  Society,  not  only  promises  to  add 
greater  efficiency  to  the  committee's  operations,  but 
also  affords  an  additional  security  to  the  members 
of  the  Establishment  that  their  measures  will  be  pur- 
sued in  strict  conformity  with  the  principles  which 
the  Church  Missionary  Society  has  always  main- 


tained."  *  The  official  countenance  of  the  Bishop, 
and  his  Lordship's  personal  attention  to  the  Society's 
interests — these  are  the  sole  grounds  of  their  re- 
joicing at  the  accession  of  Bishop  Heber  to  the 
number  of  their  supporters ;  and  we  have  no 
evidence  that  they  ever  reahsed  episcopal  super- 
intendence as  a  sacrament  of  spiritual  rule  from  the 
Lord  Himself  (however  imperfectly  administered). 
To  come  back,  however,  to  the  Low-Church 
preachings  at  home,  done  by  the  Special  Sermons 
Aid  Society.  It  is  not  said  that  any  Dissenters 
were  led  by  those  preachings  to  give  up  their  dis- 
sent, and  to  accept  the  system  of  the  Church  of 
England.  How  much  the  Low-Church  party  had 
in  common  with  Protestant  Dissenters  will  be  evi- 
dent from  the  preceding  chapters.  There  had 
been,  in  fact,  a  continual  infusion,  so  to  say,  of 
Dissenting  blood.  Mr.  Eomaine's  father  had  been 
a  French  Protestant.  Newton's  mother  had  been 
a  Dissenter,  and  Newton  himself  had  derived  his 
religious  views  in  part  from  a  Captain  Clunie, 
also  a  Dissenter.  Cecil's  mother  was  a  Dissenter. 
Scott's  mother  was  of  Puritan  descent.  Dean 
Milner  had  made  one  of  Jonathan  Edwards's  works 
a  subject  of  careful  study.  Wilberforce  had  de- 
rived his  religious  views  from  Doddridge's  Rise  and 
Progress.  Cowper  had  a  Dissenting  minister,  the 
Eev.  William  Bull,  for  one  of  his  intimate  friends. 
Henry  Thornton's  father  had  been  the  teacher  of  a 
Dissenting  academy.  Zachary  Macaulay  was  the 
son  of  a  Presbyterian  minister.     Hannah  More  had 

*  Knight's  Memoir  of  the  Bev.  H.  Venn.     New  edition  (1882), 
p.  143,  note. 


studied  Puritan  theology,  including  Matthew  Henry's 
Commentary,  Nor  was  the  relationship  without 
some  acknowledgment  on  the  part  of  Dissenters. 
The  Editor  of  the  Christian  Observer  wrote  :  "It  is, 
we  hope,  no  discredit  to  us  as  Episcopalians,  and 
certainly  it  is  none  to  us  on  the  general  ground 
either  of  Christianity  or  of  literature,  that  it  was 
Dr.  Dwiglit  who  first  and  most  warmly  introduced 
us  to  his  compatriots."  *  This  Dr.  Dwight  was 
President  of  Yale  College,  Connecticut. 

Instances  of  fraternising  with  Dissent  had  been 
furnished  from  time  to  time  by  Low-Churchmen, 
when  they  could  so  act  with  impunity.  The 
Eclectic  Society  in  London,  the  object  of  which 
was  theological  discussion,  numbered  several  Dis- 
senting ministers  among  its  members.  Simeon 
had  both  preached  and  communicated  in  the 
Presbyterian  Kirk  of  Scotland.  Nicolayson  had 
allowed  a  Presbyterian  to  join  with  him  in  ad- 
ministering the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Body  and 
Blood  at  Jerusalem.^  Edward  Bickersteth  had 
joined  Dissenters  in  religious  meetings,  and  had 
received  benediction  from  some  Dissentinof  minis- 
ters  thereat.  And  in  the  year  1857  there  was  an 
instance  of  fraternising  with  Dissent  which  gave 
great  scandal  to  sundry  Churchpeople,  not  only 
by  the  nature  of  the  act,  but  also  by  the  eminence 
of  the  position  which  the  offender  held. 

In  that  year  there  was  held  at  Berlin  a  great 
conference  of  the  "  Evangelical  Alliance  :  "  and  it 
was  attended  by  Dr.  Alford,  Dean  of  Canterbury, 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1825,  p.  296. 
t  See  above,  vol.  i.  p.  279. 


amongst  other  English— tlie  same  person  who, 
when  Minister  of  Quebec  Chapel,  London,  had 
been  so  abused  by  the  Record  for  his  views  on  the 
question  of  the  Lord's  Day  observance.  In  the 
course  of  the  proceedings  it  was  announced  that 
■on  Sunday,  September  13,  at  nine  o'clock  in  the 
morning,  those  English  Christians  who  had  come 
to  Berlin  for  the  purpose  of  attending  the  Con- 
ference would  receive  the  Lord's  Supper  together. 
The  Dean  and  his  family  went  as  recipients,  and, 
after  they  had  taken  their  places  in  the  large 
saloon  of  the  Hotel  de  Eussie,  he  was  asked 
whether  he  would  take  part  in  distributing  the 
bread  and  wine,  the  intimation  being  given  at  the 
same  time  that  it  was  intended  merely  to  read 
1  Corinthians  xi.  23-26  and  distribute  the  bread 
and  wine  in  silence.  The  Dean  at  once  acceded. 
There  was  another  similar  communion  on  the  last 
evening  of  the  Conference  in  the  Moravian  place 
of  worship  :  and  on  that  occasion  the  Dean  par- 
took, l)ut  did  not  take  part  in  the  administration.* 
A  sentence  in  a  note  to  the  Dean  from  his  dio- 
cesan, Archbishop  Sumner,  and  which  refers  to 
the  Dean's  conduct  in  this  aflliir,  illustrates  the 
churchmanship  of  Low-Churchmen  as  being  little 
else  than  a  geographical  accident.  .  .  .  "  It  is  very 
right  that  at  home  we  should  keep  out  of  canon 
shot,  but,  widely  as  the  range  has  been  extended 
of  late  years,  I  never  before  heard  that  it  could  be 
stretched  across  the  Channel. "f 

In  this  same  year  (1857)  was  formed  the  Turkish 

*  Life  of  Dean  Alford,  pp.  279,  280. 
+  Ifc.  p.281. 


Missions  Aid  Society.  Its  objects  were,  to  assist 
with  pecuniary  grants  the  missions  in  Turkey, 
and  more  especially  those  of  the  American  Dis- 
senters who  had  been  labouring  there  for  the  last 

In  order  to  appreciate  the  general  character  of 
these  proceedings,  it  is  necessary  to  bear  in  mind 
both  those  canons  by  the  spirit  of  which  every 
clergyman  of  the  Church  of  England  is  bound, 
and  also  the  promise  which  every  priest  makes  at 
his  ordination.  Canon  IX.  enacts  :  "  Whosoever 
shall  hereafter  separate  themselves  from  the  Com- 
munion of  Saints,  as  it  is  approved  by  the 
Apostles'  rules,  in  the  Church  of  England,  and 
combine  themselves  together  in  a  new  brother- 
hood, accounting  the  Christians  who  are  com- 
formable  to  the  doctrine,  government,  rites,  and 
ceremonies  of  the  Church  of  England  to  be  pro- 
fane, and  unmeet  for  them  to  join  with  in  Christian 
profession  ;  let  them  be  excommunicated  ipso  facto, 
and  not  restored  but  by  the  archl^ishop,  after  their 
repentance  and  public  revocation  of  such  their 
wicked  errors."  Canon  XXYII.  runs  thus  :  "  No 
minister,  when  he  celebrateth  the  Communion, 
shall  wittingly  administer  the  same  to  any  but  to 
such  as  kneel,  under  pain  of  suspension,  nor,  under 
the  hke  pain,  to  any  that  refuse  to  be  present  at 
public  prayers  according  to  the  orders  of  the 
Church  of  England."  And  in  the  ordination  of 
priests  the  bishop  is  directed  to  put  the  foUowinj? 
solemn  question  :  "  Will  you  then  give  your  faith- 
ful diligence  always  so  to  minister  the  doctrine 
and  sacraments,  and   the  discipline  of  Christ,  as 


the  Lord  liatli  commanded,  and  as  this  Church  and 
realm  hath  received  the  same,  according  to  tlie 
commandments  of  God ;  so  that  you  may  teach 
the  people  committed  to  your  cure  and  charge 
with  all  diligence  to  keep  and  observe  the  same  ?  " 
To  which  each  candidate  makes  answer,  "  I  will  so 
do,  by  the  help  of  the  Lord." 

Low-Churchmen,  however,  grounded  their 
Church  principles  on  considerations  not  of  what 
the  Church  of  England  was,  and  of  what  she  re- 
quired, but  of  what  the  Church  of  England  ought 
to  be,  and  of  what  she  ought  to  require — in  their 
opinion.*  Time  was  when  Low-Churchmen  would 
not  have  dared  to  commit  such  irreo^ularities  as 
we  have  described.  Fletcher  of  Madeley  expected 
to  be  deposed  from  the  ministry  for  much  less 
misdemeanours,  if  indeed  his  proceedings  could 
be  called  misdemeanours  at  all.  As  time  went 
on,  however,  and  the  Low-Church  party  became 
numerous  and  powerful,  Low-Churchmen  became 
more  bold  in  their  contempt  for  Church  rules 
and  Church  principles :  until  at  last  a  bishop  did 
not  refuse  to  preach  again  and  again  in  Presby- 
terian kirks,  and  as  a  Presbyterian  minister.  That, 
however,  did  not  occur  until  more  than  twenty 
years  after  this. 

Nor  was  the  fraternising  with  Dissent  the  re- 
sult of  Christian  charity  pure  and  simple,  or  of 
real  catholicity  of  spirit.     Charity  has  respect  to 

*  We  have  seen  a  letter  to  the  editor  of  a  country  newspaper,  in 
which  the  writer,  combatting  the  statement  that  the  Church  of 
England  was  not  Protestant,  did  so  by  saying  hat  if  the  Chm-ch  of 
England  was  not  Protestant  she  ought  to  be  so. 


men  as  men :  in  the  sentiment  so  well  expressed 
by  the  heathen  dramatist : — 

Homo  sum,  hiimani  nihil  a  me  alieniim  piito. 
"  A  man  am  I,  anil  feel  for  all  mankind." 

Catholicity  has  respect  to  man  as  baptized  into 
Christ.  It  sympathises  with  all  baptized  people 
in  virtue  of  the  one  Baptism  which  all  have  re- 
ceived. The  Low-Church  spirit,  however — that 
spirit  which  showed  itself  in  the  ways  just  men- 
tioned— was  little  else  than  a  sympathy  in  re- 
ligious opinions  :  those  opinions  being  heretical 
as  often  as  not.  It  was  a  sympathy  with  those 
who  denied  the  Holy  Catholic  Church  in  the  sense 
in  which  that  term  has  always  been  taken ;  it  was 
a  sympathy  with  those  who  denied  baptism  as  the 
means  of  effecting  our  union  with  Christ ;  with 
those  who  denied  that  the  Lord's  Body  and  Blood 
are  really  present,  in  the  Eucharistic  paten  and 
chalice,  for  our  spiritual  food  and  refreshment ; 
with  those  who  denied  that  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
has  left  authority  in  His  Church  to  absolve  any- 
one at  all ;  and  with  those  generally  who  denied 
aU  sacramental  grace.  It  was  a  sympathv  with 
persons  who  were  not  only  in  separation  from  the 
Church  of  England,  but  more  or  less  in  opposition 
to  her.  It  was  a  sympathy  with  them  in  their  an- 
tagonism to  many  Catholic  doctrines  and  Catholic 
usages.*     It   was    an    admission    that   Dissenting- 

*  The  writer  has  been  present  in  more  than  one  Low-Chm-ch 
family  in  which,  when,  at  family  worship,  hymns  were  sunt^,  the 
posture  adopted  was  in  each  case  that  of  sitting — the  same  which 
is  commonly  adopted  by  Presbyterians  and  other  Dissenters  when 
they  sing  in  their  public  worship.  And  in  all  the  Low-Chmxh 
n.  6 

66  REVIVAL    OF   THE 

ministers  were  as  truly  commissioned  by  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  as  those  who  had  been  vahdly  or- 
dained by  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  a  bishop 
in  accordance  with  primitive  canon.  It  was  an 
association  against  Popery,  but  including  under 
the  name  of  Popery  whatever  was  felt  to  be  in- 
consistent with  Protestant  unbelief  or  Protestant 


Polemical  Period,  continued.  Eev.  A.  Poole  turned  out  of  his 
Curacy  for  hearing  Confessions,  &c.  Complaints  against  the 
Rev.  il.  T.  West.  Disregard  of  Truth.  Promotions  of  Low- 
Chiu-chmen  by  Lord  Palmerston. 

"  Thou  hast  let  thy  mouth  speak  wickedness :  and  with  thy 
tongue  thou  hast  set  forth  deceit.  Thou  satest,  and  spakest  against 
thy  brother:  yea,  and  hast  slandered  thine  own  mother's  son." — 
Psalm  1.  19,  20  (Prayer-book  version). 

"  Thou  didst  trust  in  thy  way,  in  the  multitude  of  thy  mighty 
men." — Hosea  x.  13. 

The  two  great  sacraments  of  the  Gospel  had  now 
been  the  occasion  of  proceedings  in  the  courts  of 
law,  owing  to  the  antagonism  of  Low-Churchmen  to 
the  Catholic  doctrine  thereon.  One  of  the  lesser 
sacraments — that  is  to  say,  the  administration 
thereof — was  now  to  furnish  occasion  for  similar 
proceedings,  and  for  the  like  reason. 

Anglican  Christians  had,  in  God's  goodness, 
come  to  realise  in  some  measure  the  supernatural 
character   of  the    state    into   which   persons    are 

manuals  of  family  prayer  which  he  has  seen,  the  model  followed 
has  been,  not  the  Catholic  one  of  short  prayers,  with  versicles  and 
responses,  but  the  Puritan  one  of  single  prayers  two  or  three  pages 


brought  in  Christian  baptism.  They  had  also 
learnt  to  discern  the  Lord's  Body  and  Blood  in  the 
Holy  Eucharist  as  present  really,  though  super- 
naturally  and  spiritually.  And  at  the  same  time, 
as  was  naturally  to  be  expected,  there  had  come 
to  be  realised  in  numberless  cases  a  need  of 
spiritual  cleansing  through  some  sacramental  rite. 
Thus  attention  was  drawn  to  the  rite  provided 
by  the  Lord  Himself  for  such  cases — the  rite 
or  sacrament  of  Absolution — to  the  existence  of 
which  in  the  Church,  and  by  virtue  of  the  Lord's 
institution  and  appointment,  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land had  never  ceased  bearing  witness ;  sayilig  to 
her  priests  in  their  ordination,  "  Wliose  sins  thou 
dost  forgive,  they  are  forgiven,  and  whose  sins 
thou  dost  retain,  they  are  retained  ;  "  and  bidding 
the  priest  move  a  sick  person  to  special  confession 
of  his  sins  if  his  conscience  is  troubled  with  any 
weighty  matter,  and,  after  such  confession  made, 
to  absolve  him  (if  he  humbly  and  heartily  desire 
absolution)  in  the  same  form  which  is  still  in  use. 
The  practice,  however,  which  the  Church  thus 
contemplated  had  fallen  into  much  disuse.  A 
clergyman  who  was  at  this  time  a  dignitary,  and 
the  incumbent  of  an  important  London  church — 
the  Eev.  Archibald  Boyd,  then  Honorary  Canon 
of  Gloucester,  and  Licumbent  of  Paddington,  and 
afterwards,  owing  to  a  mistake  of  the  Queen's,* 

*  The  Queen  bad  been  much  pleased  with  a  work  which  came 
out  anonjTnously  at  first,  imder  the  title  TJiougJds  of  a  Country 
Parson.  The  title  was  misleading,  for  the  author  was  really  a 
minister  in  one  of  the  Presbyterian  communions.  Wlien  the 
deanery  of  Exeter   fell  vacant,  her  Majesty,  miderstanding  that 



Dean  of  Exeter — afterwards  declared  (and,  if  we 
remember  right,  with  an  expression  of  thankful- 
ness to  Almighty  God)  that  he  had  never  used  the 
absolution  for  a  sick  person  at  all.  And  thus  it 
was  but  natural,  in  the  revival  of  the  ordinance, 
that  mistakes  should  be  made,  which  might  have 
been  avoided  but  for  the  utter  absence  not  only  of 
experience  in  the  case  of  those  who  had  to  ad- 
minister it,  but  also  of  such  teaching  as  they  ought 
to  have  had  at  the  hands  of  their  ecclesiastical 
superiors.  And,  in  point  of  fact,  mistakes  were 
made  ;  and  excuse  was  thus  given  to  those  with 
whom  the  revival  of  the  ordinance  was  matter  of 
fear — excuse  of  which  those  persons  were  not  slow 
to  avail  themselves :  excuse  for  manifesting  their 
Protestant  unbelief,  and  denial  of  sacramental 
grace  in  general.  As,  for  instance,  when,  on  the 
8th  of  December,  1850,  Dr.  McNeile  preached  in 
St.  Paul's,  Liverpool,  that  he  would  have  capital 
punishment  inflicted  on  any  clergyman  who  heard 
a  confession ;  that  transportation  would  not  satisfy 
him — nothing  would  suffice  but  death. 

Some  complaints  had  been  made  to  the  Bishop 
of  Chichester  (Dr.  Gilbert)  with  reference  to  the 
proceedings  of  the  Eev.  John  Mason  Neale  in  re- 
ceiving confessions  :  but  it  does  not  seem  that  the 
Bishop  felt  called  upon  to  do  more  than  refuse  the 
sanction  of  his  name  any  more  to  the  sisterhood 
of  St.  Margaret  at  East  Grinstead,  and  write  to  the 

the  name  of  the  author  was  Boyd,  desired  that  the  deanery  might 
be  given  to  him.  The  Clergy  List  was  then  examined,  and  the 
Rev.  Archibald  Boj'd  was  appointed,  on  the  supposition  that  it  was 
he  who  had  written  the  book  in  question. 

REV.    A.    POOLE. —  REV.    R.    T.    WEST.  69 

party  wlio  alleged  himself  to  be  aggrieved,  about 
"  that  infatuated  man  at  East  Grinstead." 

The  nature  of  the  proceedings  when  confession 
is  made  with  a  view  to  absolution  made  it,  gene- 
rally speaking,  impossible  to  substantiate  with 
legal  evidence  any  statements  which  might  be  made 
concerning  such  proceedings.  To  the  priest  it  is 
a  grave  spiritual  offence  to  reveal  what  has  passed 
between  him  and  a  penitent ;  and  the  penitent  is 
bound  in  honour  to  preserve  a  like  silence.  These 
considerations  ought  always  to  be  borne  in  mind 
in  estimating  the  character  of  such  proceedings  as 
those  now  to  be  narrated.  But  nevertheless  it  is 
remarkable  that  in  both  those  cases  in  which  public 
complaint  was  made  in  the  year  1858  against  clergy- 
men on  account  of  what  passed  between  them  and 
their  penitents,  the  charges  were  formally  and  ex- 
pressly denied.  The  cases  to  which  we  allude 
were  those  of  the  Eev.  Alfred  Poole,  Curate  of  St. 
Barnabas's,  Pimlico,  and  the  Eev.  Eichard  Temple 
West,  Curate  of  All  Saints',  Boyne  Hill,  in  the  Dio- 
cese of  Oxford.  In  each  of  these  cases,  the  charge 
was  that  of  putting  immoral  questions, — that  is  to 
say,  questions  bearing  on  the  breach  of  the  Seventh 
Commandment ;  and  in  the  case  of  Mr.  West,  the 
further  charge  was  brought  of  asking  the  penitent 
(a  married  woman)  not  to  tell  her  husband  what 
had  passed. 

The  complaint  against  Mr.  Poole  was  brought  by 
a  brother  clergyman,  the  Hon.  and  Eev.  F.  Baring, 
in  March.  It  was  accompanied  by  the  evidence 
of  three  who  had  posed  as  Mr.  Poole's  penitents, 
who  had  led   notoriouslv  immoral  lives,  and  one 

70  MR.    POOLE    DEPRIVED    OF    HIS    LICENCE. 

of  whom  had  come  to  the  priest  for  money,  and 
represented  certain  questions  as  put  to  her  in  a 
more  gross  form  than  they  really  were.  That  Mr. 
Poole  had  acted  indiscreetly  in  some  respects  is 
certain ;  but  that  he  was  guilty  of  anything  worse 
(save  the  obvious  enormity,  to  Protestant  eyes,  of 
receiving  confessions  and  ministering  absolution 
at  all)  no  one  dared  to  insinuate.  And  yet  on 
these  grounds,  and  on  these  alone,  the  Bishop  of 
London  (Dr.  Tait)  summarily  revoked  Mr.  Poole's 
licence,  May  25.  (It  is  to  be  observed  that  Dr. 
Blomfield  had  resigned  the  See  of  London  in  Sep- 
tember 1856,  and  been  succeeded  by  Dr.  Archibald 
Campbell  Tait,  Dean  of  Carlisle,  on  the  nomination 
of  the  Earl  of  Derby.) 

Mr.  Poole  appealed  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury (Dr.  Sumner) ;  asserting,  among  other  grounds 
for  so  doing,  that  Mr.  Baring's  statements  were  en- 
tirely and  deliberately  untrue.  The  Archbishop, 
however,  after  a  short  correspondence  with  the 
Bishop  of  London,  and  without  hearing  Mr.  Poole 
at  all  in  his  own  defence,  confirmed  the  revocation 
of  his  licence.  Hereupon  Mr.  Poole  applied  to  the 
Court  of  Queen's  Bench  for  a  w^rit  oiniandamus  com- 
pelling the  Archbishop  to  hear  his  cause ;  which 
writ  being  granted,  the  Archbishop,  with  Dr.  Lush- 
ington  for  assessor,  held  a  court  in  the  hall  of 
Lambeth  Palace,  February  18,  1859  ;  and  after 
hearing  counsel  and  receiving  evidence,  pronounced 
in  the  following  month  that  good  and  reasonable 
cause  had  been  given  for  the  revocation  of  the 
licence.  (The  official  confirmation  was  dated  July 
9th.)     This  judgment,  the  Editor  of  the  Christian 


Observer  remarked,  would  cause  thanksgivings  to 
abound  in  every  place  where  the  purity  of  the 
Church  of  England  was  prized  and  had  been  felt  to  be 
in  danger.  Once  more,  therefore,  he  thanked  God 
and  took  courage.  A  Tractarian  clergyman  had 
been  turned  out  of  his  curacy,  it  mattered  not 
whether  for  a  grave  moral  offence  or  for  a  mere  piece 
of  indiscretion.  In  point  of  fact,  it  was  for  having 
merely  used  his  own  private  judgment  on  points 
whereon  he  had  no  authoritative  guidance  at  all, 
save  what  might  have  been  given  him  by  his  in- 
cumbent. Unable  to  obtain  justice  from  the  Arch- 
bishop, Mr.  Poole  appealed  to  the  Privy  Council. 
That  tribunal,  however,  pronounced  the  Arch- 
bishop's sentence  to  be  final.  This  was  in  1861. 
In  the  course  of  two  or  three  months,  however, 
Mr.  Poole  was  presented  to  a  living  in  the  Diocese 
of  Winchester,  and  no  objection  was  made  to  his 
institution ;  the  Low-Church  bishop,  Dr.  Charles 
Eichard  Sumner,  knowing  that  objection  would  be 

It  is  worth  noticing  here,  as  what  was  becoming 
a  characteristic  of  the  Low-Church  party,  how  the 
most  gratuitous  misrepresentation  was  brought  to 
bear  by  members  of  that  party  upon  High-Church- 
men. Besides  the  instance  we  have  just  seen,  as 
afforded  by  Mr.  Baring  against  Mr.  Poole,  the  Editor 
of  the  Christian  Observer^  in  an  article  upon  Pri- 
vate Confession,  spoke  of  clerical  confessors  as 
selecting  their  penitents,  and  of  lady-visitors  as 
huntiyig  up  penitents  for  the  confessional.  The 
intelligence  or  the  veracity  of  the  Editor  was 
further  illustrated  by  the  following  remark  in  the 

72  KEV.    R.    T.    WEST. 

same  article  : — "  Whoever  they  are,  then,  who, 
within  the  Church  of  England,  take  the  confessions 
of  members  of  their  flock,  we  will  not  say  who 
urge  them,  but  who  permit  them,  who  receive  their 
people  in  their  houses  or  in  their  vestries,  in 
canonicals  or  out  of  canonicals,  with  such  forms 
as  Mr.  Liddell  prescribes,  or  without  them,  be  the 
decision  at  Lambeth  what  it  may,  they  are,  we  can 
say  no  less,  dishonest  members  of  the  Church  of 
England, "  *  One  would  have  thousfht  that  that 
rubric  had  been  expunged  from  the  Prayer-book, 
"  Here  shall  the  sick  persoji  be  moved  to  make  a 
special  confession  of  his  sins,  if  he  feel  his  conscience 
troubled  ivith  any  iveighty  matter.  After  which  con- 
fession, the  priest  shall  absolve  him  (if  he  humbly 
and  heartily  desire  it)  after  this  sort :  Our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  Wlio  hath  left  power  to  His  Church  to 
absolve  all  sinners  who  truly  repent  and  believe  in 
Him,  of  His  great  mercy  forgive  thee  thine  offences  : 
and  by  His  authority  committed  to  me,  I  absolve 
thee  from  all  thy  sins,  in  the  Name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.    Amen." 

The  complaint  against  Mr.  West  was  brought,  July 
14,  1858,  by  the  Eev.  John  Shaw,  Vicar  of  Stoke, 
the  churchwardens  of  the  same  parish,  and  nine  of 
the  inhabitants,  communicants  in  the  Church  of 
England  ;  and  asked  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  (Dr.  Wil- 
berforce)  to  institute  a  full  inquiry  into  the  charges 
— published  originally  in  the  Windsor  Express  by 
a  Mr.  Joseph  H.  Clark,  of  Maidenhead,  who  had 
professed  himself  ready  to  substantiate  them — 
and  asking  the  Bishop  further  that,  if  the  charges 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1859,  p.  264. 


were  found  true,  the  accused  miglit  be  censured 
or  punished.  The  Bishop  thereupon  commissioned 
Dr.  PhiUimore,  Archdeacon  Eandall,  the  Eev.  J. 
E.  A.  Leigh,  and  two  others  named  Sawyer  and 
Hibbert,  to  inquire  accordingly.  These  commis- 
sioners, after  a  full  examination,  decided  that  the 
charge  had  not  been  substantiated.  And  the 
Bishop,  in  acknowledging  their  report,  stated  that 
he  heartily  accepted  their  decision  as  his  own.  The 
Editor,  however,  of  the  Christian  Observer,  in  record- 
ing this,  spoke  of  the  Bishop  as  going  on  "  to  white- 
wash the  particular  offender."  *  So  little  was  truth 
regarded  when  opposed  to  the  interests  of  the  party. 

This  may  be  a  convenient  place  for  remarking 
what  an  advantage  the  Low -Church  party  had  at 
this  time  in  a  number  of  appointments  to  the  Epis- 
copate which  were  made.  Lord  Palmerston  was 
Premier  from  June  18,  1859,  till  November  3, 
1861,  and  in  that  time  no  fewer  than  eight  sees  be- 
came vacant  through  the  death  of  their  occupants. 
Now  it  so  happened  that  at  this  time  the  Earl  of 
Shaftesbury  was  in  the  confidence  of  the  Govern- 
ment in  ecclesiastical  affairs.  The  Earl  of  Shaftes- 
bury had  for  many  years  past  been  an  encourager 
of  various  philanthropic  institutions  and  schemes, 
but  chiefly  of  such  religious  societies  as  were  of 
a  distinctly  Low-Church  character  or  constitution. 
And  owing  to  the  influence  which  he  had  with 
Lord  Palmerston's  Government,  the  following  cler- 
gymen were  promoted  to  the  episcopal  bench  : — 

The  Eev.  Charles  Baring  to  the  See  of  Gloucester 
and  Bristol  in  1856.     On  the  decease,  in  1861,  of 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1858,  p.  744. 

74  LORD  palmerston's 

Bishop  Montagu  Villiers,  Dr.  Baring  was  translated 
to  the  See  of  Durham. 

The  Hon.  and  Eev.  Henry  Montagu  Villiers, 
Rector  of  St.  George's,  Bloomsbury,  to  the  See  of 
Carlisle  in  1856.  On  the  translation  of  Dr.  Long- 
ley  to  the  See  of  York  in  1860,  Dr.  Montagu 
Yilliers  was  selected  to  succeed  him  at  Durham. 

The  Rev.  Robert  Bickersteth,  Rector  of  St.  Giles's- 
in-the-Fields,  London,  to  the  See  of  Ripon  in  1857. 

The  Hon.  and  Rev.  John  Thomas  Pelham,  Rector 
of  St.  Mary-le-bone,  London,  to  the  See  of  Norwich 
in  1857. 

The  Rev.  James  Colquhoun  Campbell,  Rector  of 
Merthyr-Tydfil,  Glamorganshire,  Archdeacon  of 
LlandafF,  and  Honorary  Canon  of  Llandaff  Cathe- 
dral, to  the  See  of  Bangor  in  1859. 

The  Ven.  Joseph  Cotton  Wigram,  Rector  of  St. 
Mary's,  Southampton,  and  Archdeacon  of  Win- 
chester, to  the  See  of  Rochester  in  1860. 

The  Rev.  Henry  Philpott,  Master  of  St.  Cathe- 
rine's College,  Cambridge,  to  the  See  of  Worcester 
in  1860. 

The  Hon.  and  Rev.  Samuel  Waldegrave,  Rector 
of  Barford-St.-Martin,  Wiltshire,  and  Canon  of 
Salisbury,  to  the  See  of  Carlisle,  on  the  translation, 
in  1860,  of  Dr.  Montagu  Villiers  to  Durham. 

The  Rev.  William  Thomson,  D.D.,  Provost  of 
Queen's  College,  Oxford,  and  Preacher  at  Lincoln's 
Inn,  to  the  See  of  Gloucester  and  Bristol  in  1861. 
Dr.  Thomson  was  afterwards  promoted  to  the 
Archbishopric  of  York,  on  the  translation,  in  1863, 
of  Dr.  Longley  to  Canterbury. 

The  Very  Rev.  C.  J.  EUicott,  who  had  lately  been 
made  Dean  of  Exeter,  to  the  See  of  Gloucester  and 


Bristol,  on  the  translation,  in  1863,  of  Dr.  Thomson 
to  the  Archbishopric  of  York. 

Of  the  clergymen  thus  promoted,  not  one  appears 
to  have  effected  any  sensible  improvement  in  his 
diocese.  Dr.  Pelham,  on  the  occasion  of  a  pubhc 
fast-day,  invited  the  clergy  of  Norwich  to  meet 
certain  Dissenting  ministers  at  the  Palace  for  a 
"  prayer-meeting  ;  "  which  invitation,  however,  was, 
we  beheve,  generally  ignored.  Dr.  Campbell,  at 
an  ordination  in  the  early  part  of  his  episcopate, 
omitted  the  administration  of  the  Holy  Communion 
on  the  ground  that  he  was  going  to  preach  the 
same  day  in  another  church.  Dr.  Wigram  signal- 
ised his  episcopate  by  inveighing,  in  an  episcopal 
charge,  against  the  enormity  of  clergymen  grow- 
ing moustaches  and  beards.  Dr.  Philpott  made 
no  secret  of  his  sympathy  with  Dr.  Colenso's  here- 
tical party  in  South  Africa.  The  same  is  only  too 
true  of  Dr.  Thomson.  Dr.  Waldegrave  wrote  a 
preface  to  a  penny  abbreviation  of  Foxe's  Book 
of  Martyrs.  Dr.  Montagu  Villiers,  as  Bishop  of 
Durham,  gave  the  living  of  Haughton-le-Skerne, 
worth  £1,600  a  year,  with  a  house,  to  a  relative  or 
connection,  the  Eev.  Edward  Cheese — a  young  man 
who  had  been  not  more  than  five  years  in  holy 
orders — the  population  of  the  parish  in  1860  being 
6,793.  This  piece  of  nepotism  gave  occasion  to 
an  old  clergyman  of  the  diocese  to  remark  that 
the  appointment  was  not  to  be  wondered  at,  for 
that  cheese  was  always  served  before  des[s]ert. 
When,  soon  after  this,  Dr.  Montagu  ViUiers  died, 
a  Low-Church  friend  of  the  present  writer  avowed 
his  belief  that  it  was  a  judgment  from  God  for  the 
same  piece  of  jobbery. 

76  LORD  palmerston's 

Dr.  Baring  took  an  early  opportunit}^  after  his 
consecration  of  avowing  that  he   could  not  help 
being  a  party  man,  and  meant  to  administer  the 
diocese    as    a   party   man.      With   regard   to   his 
administration  of  the  Durham  diocese,  which  he 
held  from  1861  to  1879,  it  may  be  noted  that  the 
number  of  deacons  ordained  b}-  him  in  the  last 
four  years  of  his    episcoj^ate  was  only  119,  the 
proportion   of  graduates  from  Oxford  and  Cam- 
bridge was  only  one-fifth,  and  the  number  of  per- 
sons confirmed  only  17,504  ;  while  under  the  rule 
of  his  successor.  Bishop  Lightfoot,  the  number  of 
deacons  ordained  up  to  Christmas  1882  was  134, 
though  the  last  two  ordinations  had  taken  place 
since  the  separation  of  the  Diocese  of  Newcastle  ; 
the  number  of  graduates  from  Oxford  and  Cam- 
bridge was  more  than  half,   and  the  number  of 
persons  confirmed  25,530.     Dr.  Philpott,  a  friend 
of  the  Prince  Consort,  was  more  a  Broad-Church- 
man than  a  Low-Churchman  ;  and  Dr.  EUicott  was 
somewhat  of  a  High-Churchman.     The  latter,  how- 
ever, learned  to  profess  retractation  of  his  views  as 
to  the  ministry  of  supernatural  grace  in  the  act 
of  ordination,  and  to  make  himself  both  despised 
and  detested  bv  the  line  which  he  took  against 
the  Eitualists — of  whom  more  hereafter.     And  the 
greater  number  of  these  prelates  wrought  in  the 
interests  of  the  Low-Church  party  by  never  giving 
preferment,  if  they  could  help  it,  to  any  save  Low- 
Churchmen.     Great  was  the  joy  caused  in  conse- 
quence among  the  Low-Church  ranks.     In  the  year 
1855  Lord  Palmerston  had  contradicted  not  only 
one  of  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  but 


one  of  the  favourite  doctrines  of  the  Low-Church 
party,  by  saying,  at  an  agricuUurists'  meeting  at 
Eomsey,  that  all  infants  were  born  good.  Now, 
however,  all  that  heresy  was  forgotten :  Lord 
Palmerstoii  was  almost  canonised ;  and  one  enthu- 
siastic writer  of  a  small  pamphlet  called  down 
blessings  from  heaven  upon  the  noble  viscount's 
head  for  having,  by  making  such  appointments  as 
those  just  mentioned,  saved  us  from  "  a  national 
overthrow  as  a  Church,"  whatever  that  expression 
might  mean. 

We  do  not  know  whether  the  two  remaining 
episcopal  appointments  of  Lord  Palmerston — that 
of  Dr.  Harold  Browne  to  the  See  of  Ely,  and  that 
of  Dr.  Jeune  to  the  See  of  Peterborough — were 
owing  to  Lord  Shaftesbury's  influence.  If  so,  it 
may  be  well  to  remember  that,  although  the  former 
prelate  was  not  a  Low-Churchman,  neither  could  he 
be  truly  called  a  High-Churchman  ;  and  that  under 
the  rule  of  Dr.  Jeune,  a  pronounced  Low-Church- 
man, the  Diocese  of  Peterborough  kept,  if  it  did 
not  gain,  the  appellation  of  "  the  Dead  See." 

Some  deaneries  also  had  fallen  to  the  disposal  of 
the  Government  about  this  time ;  and  here  also 
the  inclinations  of  the  Low-Churcli  party  were  well 
consulted;  with  the  result  of  sending  the  Eev. 
Henry  Alford  to  Canterbury  in  1857  ;  the  Eev.  C. 
J.  EUicott  (afterwards  Bishop  of  Gloucester  and 
Bristol)  to  Exeter  in  1861 ;  the  Eev.  Francis  Close* 
to  Carhsle  in  1856  ;  and  the  Eev.  William  Goode 
to  Eipon  in  1860. 

*  Who  had  been  Yicar  of  Cheltenham  for  thirty-two  years. 



Polemical  Period,  continued.     Emotional  "  Revival."     Lavington 
Case.     Cuddesdon  College.     Agitation  in  the  Oxford  Diocese. 

The  year  1859  was  marked  by  the  commencement 
(3f  one  of  those  movements  which,  commencing  with 
good,  have  generally,  if  not  always,  ended  in  evil. 
We  allude  to  the  "  Eevival,"  as  it  was  called,  which 
originated  in  America,  and  spread  to  Ireland, 
Scotland,  and  North  Wales.  This  movement,  be- 
lieved by  its  promoters  to  be  a  work  of  God  the 
Holy  Ghost  Himself,  was  got  up  through  preaching 
of  a  peculiarly  emotional  character ;  under  the 
influence  of  which  persons  were  wrought  up  first 
into  a  sensation  akin  to  fear,  and  then  impelled  to 
cry  out,  and  thrown  down  on  the  ground,  or  put 
into  convulsions  of  an  hysterical  character,  and 
afterwards  changed  (so  to  say)  so  as  to  be  in  a 
sensation  of  comfort  and  complacency,  together 
with  a  kind  of  affection  for  other  persons  in  the  like 
condition.  These  emotions  were  believed  by  both 
preachers  and  hearers  to  be  that  conviction  of  sin, 
that  godly  sorrow,  that  repentance  unto  salvation, 
that  joy  and  peace,  and  that  love  of  the  brethren, 
which  some  or  all  of  God's  faithful  servants  are 
described  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  as  experiencing. 

It  was  remarked,  however,  that  the  manifesta- 
tions had  the  character  of  an  epidemic  ;  the  con- 
vulsions had  the  appearance  of  being  infectious  : 
when  one  person  was  struck  down,  others  followed 
suit.  The  preaching  which  generated  the  manifes- 
tations was  emotional  rather  than  intellectual.     In 


one  case  they  were  produced  by  the  preacher's 
manner  of  repeating,  with  a  drawl  prolonged  each 
time  beyond  what  it  had  been  the  time  before,  the 
word  "  hell."  *  Intellectual  preaching,  indeed, 
had  rather  a  tendency  to  hinder  the  excitement ;  as 
^t  one  revival-meeting,  whereat  a  person  present, 
thinking  to  help  forward  in  the  23ersons  affected 
what  he  supposed  to  be  a  process  of  true  Scrip- 
tural conversion,  began  to  read  from  the  Gospel 
the  parable  of  tlie  prodigal  son,  but  was  speedily 
interrupted  with  the  cry,  "You  shan't  spoil  our 
meeting  !  "  Nay,  it  was  found  in  more  than  one  case 
that  the  emotions  generated  were  connected  with 
an  unhealthy  excitement  of  tlie  lower  passions,  and 
the  direct  result  was  a  certain  amount  of  positive 
actual  immorality. 

The  line  taken  with  respect  to  the  movement  by 
the  Christicm  Observer  was  that  of  discriminatino- 
sympathy  ;  sympathy  with  what  seemed  to  be  real 
conversions,  but  distinguishing  between  them  and 
what  it  called  extravaofancies ;  and  desirino-  that 
the  movement  might  be  guided  by  the  clergy. 
Such,  also,  was  the  view  taken  by  the  Eev.  Heniy 
Venn  :  "that  we  must  rise  on  the  wave,  or  be  over- 
whelmed by  it."f  For  our  own  part,  we  believe  the 
movement  to  have  been  not  a  spiritual  one  at  all, 
but  an  animal  one  from  first  to  last ;  affecting  not 
the  spirits  of  the  persons  concerned,  but  only  their 
animal  souls.  As,  however,  we  are  not  aware  that 
this  explanation  of  the  phenomenon  has  ever  been 

*  The  WorJc  and  the  Counter-Work.     By  Archdeacon  Stopford 
Dublin,  1859,  p.  41. 

t  Memoir  of  the  Eev.  H.  Venn,  p.  322. 


put  before  the  public,  we  are  not  surprised  that 
Low-Churchmen  in  particular  should  have  failed 
to  adopt  it ;  though  it  was  to  their  credit  that  tJie 
movement  did  not  make  way  in  England  to  any 
extent  worth  naming. 

The  struggle,  however,  between  Protestantism 
and  Anglo -Catholicism  went  on.  In  the  year  1859 
there  occurred  what  was  termed  "  the  Lavington 
case."  The  Eev.  E.  W.  Eandall,  Eector  of  Wool 
Lavington,  in  Sussex,  was  charged  by  the  curate, 
the  Eev.  Edward  Eandall,  with  certain  teaching  as 
to  the  Sacraments  ;  that  is  to  say,  counting  seven 
sacraments,  including  "  Extreme  Unction  "  (which 
was  defined  as  "  a  sacrament  for  comfort  and  peace 
of  sick,  and  of  persons  in  health,  where  expedient "), 
and  also  with  wearing  the  garb  of  a  Eomisli  priest 
(what  this  was  does  not  appear),  crossing  himself, 
crossing  the  water  at  the  ministration  of  baptism, 
using  the  mixed  chalice,  and  elevating  the  same  in 
the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist.  The  charges  as 
to  the  teaching  were  justified  by  a  paper  given  by 
the  Eector  to  the  schoolmaster,  containing  heads  of 
doctrine  which  the  Eector  wished  to  have  taught. 
A  copy  of  this  paper  was  sent  by  the  Curate  to  the 
Bishop  of  Chichester  (Dr.  Gilbert),  the  Times,  and 
the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury ;  and  thereupon  ensued  a 
correspondence.  The  Bishop,  Low-Churchman  as 
he  was,  took  the  part  of  the  Eector ;  but  not  in  a 
very  creditable  way.  He  acquitted  the  Eector  of 
teaching  Eomish  doctrine ;  and  rightly,  except  as 
regards  Extreme  Unction  ;  but  he  condemned  him 
for  Eomish  practices,  apparently  those  Catholic 
usages  of  which  complaint  had   been   made,  and 


ordered  him,  moreover,  to  cease  using  that  hymn 
of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  an  Enghsh  version  of  whicli 
contains  these  words  : — 

"  Word  made  flesh  !     Thy  own  word  maketh 

Very  bread  Thy  flesh  to  be  ; 
Wine  the  blood  of  Christ  beconieth 

What  no  human  eye  can  see  : 
Yet  to  every  guileless  spirit 

Faith  will  teach  the  mystery." 

The  Bishop's  order  in  this  respect  was  accom- 
panied by  the  admission  that  the  hymn  in  question 
did  not  necessarity  teach  Transubstantiation. 

One  wonders  how  the  Eector  came  to  have  en- 
gaged a  curate  of  such  different  views  to  his  own. 
Eelationship  was  not  the  reason  ;  for  though  of 
the  same  name,  there  was  no  relationship  between 
the  parties.  The  Curate  put  his  case  into  the  hands 
of  the  "  Church  Protestant  Defence  Society,"  and 
that  Society,  after  some  delay,  took  the  matter  up. 
"  A  letter  from  the  secretary  to  the  Bishop,  con- 
taining a  full  review  of  the  circumstances,  and 
calling  his  Lordship's  attention  to  them,  received  a 
bare  acknowledgment.  A  second,  signed  by  Lord 
Shaftesbury  as  President,  was  somewhat  more  suc- 
cessful. In  a  short  but  not  very  courteous  letter, 
the  Bishop  replied  that  '  he  thought  it  probable 
that  Mr.  Eandall  would  give  publicity  to  some 
further  statement  from  himself.'  Six  weeks  having^ 
passed  away  without  any  further  communication, 
the  committee  then  made  a  formal  application  to 
the  Bishop  for  a  commission  under  the  Church 
Discipline  Act,  which  was  met  by  a  virtual  refusal, 
his  Lordship  referring  the  committee  to  '  a  printed 

n.  7 


correspondence  between  himself  and  the  Eector  of 
Lavington.' "  * 

The  line  thus  taken  by  the  Bishop  cannot  sur- 
prise anyone  who  reflects  that  the  action  of  the 
Curate  could  not  give  either  the  "  Church  Protes- 
tant Defence  Society  "  or  the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury, 
its  President,  any  business  at  all  to  interfere  in 
the  matter  in  question.  The  making  themselves, 
however,  busybodies  in  other  men's  matters  was 
beginning  to  be  a  characteristic  of  the  Low-Church 
party.  And  indeed  it  was  but  one  development  of 
Protestantism  in  general,  the  unlimited  exercise 
of  private  judgment  being  in  the  nature  of  things 
very  closely  allied  to  the  making  unlimited  claim 
to  responsibilities. 

It  appears  by  the  printed  correspondence  that 
the  Bishop  had  called  upon  the  Eector  to  state  the 
charges  against  himself  and  reply  to  them  ;  and  on 
the  Eector's  doing  this,  had  taken  the  questionable 
line  to  which  we  alluded  before.  Nor  would  the 
Bishop  do  more,  although  pressed  by  many  prin- 
cipal parishioners  of  WooUavington  and  Graffham, 
headed  by  three  of  the  churchwardens.  Nor  did 
any  clergyman  of  the  diocese  seem  willing  to 

The  matter  was  then  taken  up  by  a  person 
named  Golightly,  a  clergyman,  we  believe,  of  the 
Diocese  of  Oxford :  on  what  grounds  does  not 
appear,  unless  they  were  that  same  readiness  to 
become  a  busybody  in  other  men's  matters  to 
which  we  have  just  referred.  Mr.  Golightly  applied 
to  the  Bishop  of  Chichester  for  a  commission  of 

*  Cliristian  Observer  for  1859,  pp.  G12,  613. 


inquiry,  and,  on  being  refused,  applied  to  the 
Court  of  Queen's  Bench  for  a  writ  of  mandamus. 
The  rule  was  obtained,  and  the  case  in  due  course 
argued  on  both  sides,  and  judgment  deferred  for 
a  fortnight.  Meanwhile  Lord  Campbell  had  suc- 
ceeded Lord  Chelmsford  as  Lord  High  Chancellor, 
and  Sir  William  Erie  had  succeeded  Sir  Alexander 
Cockburn  as  Lord  Chief  Justice  of  the  Common 
Pleas.  Of  the  remaining  judges,  Mr.  Justice 
Wightman  held  that  the  Bishop  of  Chichester  had 
a  discretion  under  the  Church  Discipline  Act,  and 
was  therefore  legally  able  to  refuse  appointing  a 
commission.  And  Mr.  Justice  Hill  thought  that 
the  question  of  the  Bishop's  discretion  was  doubt- 
ful, but  that  at  any  rate  Mr.  Golightly,  not  being 
an  aggrieved  party,  was  not  entitled  to  relief  from 
the  court.  The  court  therefore  decided  aofainst 
him,  and  in  favour  of  the  Bishop ;  and  it  was 
stated  that  in  this  decision  Lord  Campbell  and 
Lord  Chief  Justice  Erie  concurred. 

The  hottest  part  of  the  warfare  between  Pro- 
testantism and  Catholicism  was  at  this  time  in  the 
Diocese  of  Oxford.  That  diocese  was  then  under 
the  rule  of  Dr.  Samuel  Wilberforce,  son  of  William 
Wilberforce  of  anti-slavery  celebrity.  Dr.  Wilber- 
force's  principles  were,  we  believe,  Low-Church ; 
but  with  them  he  combined  a  regard  for  the  Church 
of  England  as  represented,  to  his  view,  in  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer.  Unfortunately  for  him,  that 
view  was  no  more  than  what  is  taken  by  persons 
accustomed  to  observe  superficially :  he  had  not 
inferred  the  doctrine  of  the  Eeal  Presence  in  the 
Eucharist  from  those  two  only  words  by  which  it 



is  taught  positively  and  distinctly  in  the  Anglican 
formularies  :  lie  held  Baptismal  Eegeneration,  and 
had,  it  was  believed,  incurred  royal  disfavour  by 
insisting,  against  the  wish  of  the  Prince  Consort, 
that  the  royal  children  should  be  taught  the 
Church  Catechism :  but  he  does  not  seem  to  have 
perceived  that  that  doctrine  involves  our  partaking 
in  Christ's  resurrection-life.  On  these  accounts, 
and  owing  also,  perhaps,  to  a  love  of  making  things 
go  smoothly  between  himself  and  others,  even  at 
the  hazard  of  principles,  he  came  to  earn  such 
nicknames  as  "  Sly  Sam,"  "  Slippery  Sam,"  "  Soapy 
Sam,"  and  to  be  fully  trusted  by  no  party  at 

The  feeling,  created  by  the  study  of  Church- 
principles,  that  some  more  special  training  for 
holy  ministry  was  required  than  the  Church  of 
England  then  provided,  had  led  to  the  foundation 
of  more  than  one  distinctively  Theological  College. 
The  Theological  College  at  Chichester  had  been 
opened  in  the  year  1839,  and  that  had  been 
followed  by  the  opening,  next  year,  of  a  similar 
college  at  Wells  :  the  teachino;  in  both  which  col- 
leges  was  known  to  lean  towards  Tractarianism, 
on  account  whereof  neither  of  them  possessed 
the  confidence  of  Low-Churchmen.  And  now,  in 
1854,  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  had  opened  a  similar 
college  at  Cuddesdon,  the  place  of  his  episcopal 

In  January  1858  the  Quarterly  Review  had  con- 
tained a  strong  article,  in  which  Cuddesdon  College 
was  rather  sharply  handled.  The  chapel  (it  was 
said)  had  an  altar  in  it,  like  a  Eoman  one.     At  the 


celebration  of  the  Eucharist  genuflections  were 
made,  and  the  chalice  was  rinsed  at  a  piscina.  A 
service-book  also  was  used  "  concocted  from  the 
seven  canonical  hours  of  the  Eomish  Church." 
These  matters  were  brought  forward  again  a  few 
weeks  later,  in  a  Letter  from  a  Clergyman  of  the 
Diocese  to  the  Clergy  and  Laity  of  the  Diocese  of 
Oxford,  dated  January  28,  1858,  charging  the 
teaching  of  the  coUeo-e  authorities  as  tendino^  "  to 
sow  broadcast  the  seeds  of  Eomish  perversion  in  the 
counties  of  Oxfordshire,  Berkshire,  and  Bucking- 
hamshire." This  clergyman  was  well  known  to 
have  been  the  Eev.  Charles  Portales  Golightly, 
Curate  of  Marston. 

The  Bishop  asked  the  Principal  of  the  College 
(the  Eev.  Alfred  Pott,  since  Archdeacon  of  Berks) 
to  reply  to  the  charges.  The  Principal  immediately 
replied  that  every  one  of  the  accusations  was  either 
false  or  frivolous.  The  altar  was  a  simple  wooden 
table.  The  only  genuflections  used  were  when  the 
clergy  knelt  down  to  pray.  The  rinsing  of  the 
sacred  vessels  was  done  after  the  congregation  had 
departed.  The  "  social  services  "  other  than  the 
ordinary  Church  services  had  indeed  some  few 
prayers  taken  from  the  same  sources  from  which 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  had  been  compiled, 
but  the  rule  of  their  selection  was  "  most  strictly 
their  entire  agreement  with  the  tone  of  our  Ee- 
formed  Church."  And  as  to  the  ritual,  Mr.  Pott 
said :  "  We  have  faithfully  adhered  to  the  rules 
laid  down  by  your  Lordship,  that  our  students 
should  be  accustomed  with  us  only  to  what  they 
would  find  in  any  well-conducted  service  in  the 


churclies  to  wliicli    they  might   be  appointed  as 
curates.     In  obedience  to  this  rule  we  have  from 
time  to  time   removed   from   the   conduct  of   the 
service  anything  which  either  to  your  Lordship,  or 
any  judicious  friend,  appears  "  [he  probably  meant 
appeared]  "  questionable."     (The  things  so  removed 
appear  to  have  been  a  small  metal  cross  which 
once  stood  on  the  re-table,  and  a  cloth  with  lace.) 
In  concluding  his  reply,  the  Principal  suggested 
that  the  Bishop  should  appoint  a  commission  to 
investigate    the    charges,    and    report   to   him    as 
Visitor.     The  Bishop  did  so,  appointing  the  three 
Archdeacons  of  the  Diocese.     As,  however,  these 
were  all  personal  friends  of  the  Bishop,  and  two 
of  them  his  own  nominees,  their  report  that  Mr. 
Golightly's  charges  were  unfounded  was  received, 
according  to  the  Christian  Observer,  by  the  general 
public — that  is  to  say,  by  the  general  run  of  ignorant 
and  prejudiced  Anglican  Protestants — with  a  burst 
of  scorn ;  and  several  criticisms  of  it  appeared,  in 
which  the  ignorance  and  prejudice  of  Low-Church- 
men  were    abundantly   manifested.      One    of  the 
critics  held  that  the  painting  and  gilding  on  the 
walls  and  roof  of  the  chapel,  and  the  hangings  at 
the  east  end,  were  enough  to  justify  one  of  Mr. 
Golightly's  charges.     Much  was  made  of  the  por- 
tentous facts  that  the  altar  had  at  the  back  of  it  a 
raised  shelf,  that  its  usual  covering  was  of  crimson 
velvet,  but  that  in  Advent  and  Lent  it  was  vested 
in  a  darker  covering.    The  Christian  Observer  found 
great  fault  with  the  expression,  occurring  in  one 
of  the   "social  services,"  "We    confess  to  Thee, 
Almighty  God,  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 


Ghost,  that  we  have  sinned  exceedingly  in  thonght, 
word,  and  deed,  through  our  fault,  through  our  fault, 
through  our  grievous  fault: "  on  no  other  ground  than 
that  the  Last  specified  words  were  simihar  to  those 
used  at  confession  in  the  Church  of  Eome  :  and 
added,  "  And  now  let  the  reader  say  whether  the 
Cuddesdon  confession  suggests  any  doctrine  at 
variance  with  that  of  the  Church  of  England."  * 
According  to  the  same  sapient  authority,  the  stu- 
dents were  acting  very  questionably  in  praying 
that  they  might  be  illuminated  with  a  hnoidedge  of 
Ood's  Word  and  Sacraments :  that  they  might  be 
united  to  God  and  to  His  whole  Church  hy  His 
Holy  Mysteries ;  and  that  in  all  the  stewards  of 
God's  mysteries  the  sacred  grace  of  Orders  might 
be  stirred  up  and  confirmed.  Nothing  more,  how- 
ever, was  done,  save  the  carrying  on  of  a  paper 
war,  in  which  the  pamphlets  flew  thick  and  fast, 
until  the  combatants  w^ere  tired. 

In  January  1859  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  con- 
secrated a  new  chancel  to  the  parish  church  of 
Addington,  in  Buckinghamshire.  This  gave  rise  to 
more  literary  wrangling.  The  Diocese  of  Oxford, 
it  was  said,  was  in  a  highly  dangerous  state,  for 
there  were  stone  altars  in  six  churches  and  three 
cemetery  chapels ;  three  Cuddesdon  students  had 
joined  the  Church  of  Eome ;  another  student  was 
identified  with  the  Directorium  Anglicanum,  a  work 
the  object  of  which  was  to  show  how  much  of 
mediaeval  ceremonial  might  lawfully  (in  the  writer's 
opinion)  be  used  in  the  services  of  the  Church  of 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1859,  p.  466 


Encyland ;  there  was  a  stone  altar  in  the  church  of 
Eadley ;  and  a  stone  sLab,  supported  by  blocks  of 
wood,  in  the  parish  church  of  Wantage.     More- 
over, at  the  consecration  of  the  chancel  at  Adding- 
ton  there  had  been  processions  with  banners  and 
a  processional  cross;  and  the  like  at  Cuddesdon 
College,  in  1855.     Therefore,  it   was    concluded, 
the  diocese  was  the  centre  of  a  Eomanising  move- 
ment.   Eemonstrances  followed,  one  of  them  signed 
by  more  than  four  thousand  of  the  laity ;  and  to 
the  remonstrances  there  came,  of  course,  rephes. 
The  Bishop  said,  in  his  reply  to  the  clergy:  "The 
processions  have  been  the  walking  of  the  clergy, 
on  occasions  which  have  brought  them  together 
from  different  parishes,  from  the  room  in  which 
they  gathered  to  the  church  where  the  service  was 
held,  in  an  orderly  manner,  with  the  choir  (if  there 
were  one)  chanting  a  psalm.     I  believe  that  the 
real  objection  felt  by  many  to  this  orderly  walking 
to  church  is  the  dislike  which  they  share  with  the 
elder  Puritans  to  our  distinctive  dress  of  the  sur- 
plice.    I  see  no  objection  to  such  a  devout  and 
orderly  walking  to  church.     In  some  way  or  other 
the  passage  to  God's  house  must  be  accomphshed ; 
and  I  esteem  this  a  better  way  for  ourselves  and 
for  our  flocks,  than  that  we  should  saunter  pro- 
miscuously in,  amidst  the  disturbance  of  general 
conversation;    and  I  cannot  therefore  censure  or 
forbid  it."     On  which  common-sense  utterance  the 
Christian  Observer   remarked:  "Thus   another   of 
our  ancient  landmarks  is   broken   down;    if  the 
Bishop  of  Oxford  triumphs,  it  is  gone  for  ever; 
and  then,  or  we  grievousl}  misinterpret  the  signs 


of  the  times,  the  Church  of  England  will  soon 
follow ;  for  English  Protestants  will  far  rather  see 
their  Church  destroyed  than  see  it  made  the  ape 
of  Eome."  * 


Polemical  Period,  continued.  Low-Church  Dishonesty  in  regard  of 
the  Praj'er-book.  Agitation  for  Revision.  Prayer-book  Eevision 

TP04>02-       Q  tIkvov,  opKovs  Ufj^cifxcos  drtjuacrj;?. 
innOAYTOS.      'H  yXciXTO"'  6fxo}fj.o)(',  tj  Se  4'1")^  dpay/j-OTOS- 

Euripides,  Hijjjwlytus,  607,  608. 
Nurse.     My  child,  by  no  means  violate  an  oath  ! 
HipPOLYTUs.     My  tongue  hath  sworn,  my  mind  masworn  remains. 

While  the  events  narrated  in  the  chapter  just  pre- 
ceding were  passing,  a  movement  had  been  going 
on  within  the  Low-Church  party  to  which,  although 
not  extensive,  the  reader's  attention  must  now  be 
directed  ;  a  movement  for  revisinof  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer  in  a  Protestant  direction. 

From  the  very  commencement  of  the  Low-Church 
movement,  Low-Churchpeople  had  had  difficulties 
as  to  the  use  of  various  parts  of  the  Prayer-book. 
Fletcher  of  Madeley,  Henry  Venn  the  elder,  Thomas 
Scott,  all  disliked  the  Baptismal  Service.  Thomas 
Scott  gives  a  hint,  in  his  comment  on  John  xx.  23, 
that  he  did  not  altogether  approve  of  the  form 
of  ordination — "Eeceive  the  Holy  Ghost  for  the 
office  and  work  of  a  Priest  .  .  .  Wliose  sins  thou 
dost  forgive,  they  are  forgiven,"  &c.  The  same 
divine,  writing  on  the  5th  of  April,  1818,  says  :  "  I 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1859;  p.  535. 


have  little  objection  to  the  doctrine  or  to  the  spirit 
of  the  Atlianasian  Creed."  Some  objection,  then, 
he  had.  The  Atlianasian  Creed  was  frequently- 
omitted  by  him,*  and  Ijy  other  Low-Church  clergy- 
men ;  and  the  like  course  was  pursued  in  regard  to 
the  greater  part  of  that  exhortation  which  ends  by 
recommending  (in  certain  cases)  special  confession 
to  the  priest,  with  a  view  to  the  benefit  of  absolu- 
tion. In  1833  the  desire  for  a  revision  seems  to 
have  been  entertained  very  generally  among  Low- 
Churchmen. f  Li  1840  the  Christian  Observer  had 
spoken  about  "  a  few  ill-understood  passages  in  our 
offices  "  as  causing  brethren  to  stumble. ;|;  In  1845 
a  meeting  at  Alphington,  in  the  Diocese  of  Exeter, 
had  voted  a  revision  of  the  rubrics  to  be  neces- 
sary.^ A  clergyman,  also  a  magistrate,  told  the 
present  writer  that  his  informant  was  once  present 
in  a  church  Avhere  the  officiating  minister,  after 
baptizing  a  child,  and  saying,  "  Seeing  now,  dearly 
beloved  brethren,  that  this  child  is  regenerate,"  &c., 
interpolated — "not  one  word  of  which  do  I  believe." 
Dean  Boyd  of  Exeter  professed,  and  (if  we  remember 
right)  with  thankfulness  to  God,  that  he  had  never 
pronounced  absolution  in  the  form  given  in  the 
office  for  Visitation  of  the  Sick.  In  Lincolnshire 
it  was,  we  believe,  a  common  practice  to  baptize  in 
church  with  the  form  appointed  for  baptism  in 
houses ;  thus  getting  rid  of  the  necessity  of  sponsors. 
One  correspondent  of  the  Christian  Observer  had 
written  in  1826 :  "  I  firmly  believe  that  many  sound 

*  Life,  p.  338. 

t  Christian  Observer,  1833,  p.  601  ;  see  also  for  1845,  p.  174. 

X  lb.  1840,  p.  382.  §  lb.  1845,  p.  168. 


Churchmen  would  be  heartily  glad  to  be  freed  from 
the  burden  of  the  Apocryphal  lessons."  *  And 
another,  about  the  "  large  class  of  our  clergy  and 
laity  who  lament  the  introduction  of  Apocryphal 
lessons  into  the  service  of  our  Church."  f  Dean 
Close  of  Carlisle  told  the  Eitual  Commissioners  in 
1867 :  "I  never  read  the  Apocrypha :  J  I  read 
through  Job  or  Proverbs  as  long  as  the  Apocrypha 
is  appointed."  §  A  correspondent  of  the  Church 
Times,  writing  of  a  period  a  few  years  later,  said  : 
"  I  well  remember  some  fifteen  years  ago "  [i.e. 
about  1865],  "when  the  Birkenhead  clergy  used 
to  meet  every  Saturday  for  united  prayer,  how  a 
respected  and  aged  priest  used  regularly  to  adapt 
the  words  of  the  Litanv  to  the  feeling-s  of  Pro- 
test  autism,  and  pray  that  God  would  bless  '  all 
bishops,  presbyters,  and  curates  : '  thus  getting  rid 
of  the  obnoxious  term  '  Priests.'  "  ||  The  Eev.  Carr 
J.  Glyn,  in  a  speech  made  at  an  annual  meeting  of 
the  Prayer-book  Eevision  Society,  May  9,  1882, 
said :  "A  great  deal  of  harm  had  arisen  from  the 
consecration  of  the  elements.  He  believed  that 
for  a  hundred  years  that  was  not  allowed  in  their 
Church."  Henry  Venn  the  younger,  secretary  to 
the  "  Church  Missionary  Society,"  made  the  follow- 
ing entry  in  his  private  journal  on  the  31st  of 
December,  1849: — "Eeceived  a  note  from  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  approving  of  the  reso- 
lutions which  1  had  drawn  up  for  the  circulation 
of  a  selection  from  the  Prayer-book  in  our  native 

*   Christian  Observer  for  1826,  p.  87.  f  lb.  p.  600. 

X  Ritual  Commission,  p.  41,  §  lb.  p,  42. 

II  Letter  to  the  Church  Times  of  October  22,  1880. 


churclies,  instead  of  the  whole  book,  witli  its  Apo- 
cryphal lessons,  rubrics,  &c.  .  .  ."  That  Arch- 
bishop was  the  Low-Church  Dr.  Sumner.  The 
entry  in  the  journal  tells  a  long  tale.  Had  it  been 
in  contemplation  to  print  at  once  those  parts  only 
of  the  Prayer-book  which  were  required  for  im- 
mediate use  in  native  congregations — such  as  the 
offices  for  Adult  Baptism,  Mattins,  Evensong,  and 
the  Holy  Eucharist,  minus  the  Collects,  Epistles, 
and  Gospels,  with  the  Litany,  and  Athanasian 
Creed,  and  those  rubrics  which  refer  to  the  duties 
of  the  people,  and  to  leave  all  the  rest  to  be  added 
at  leisure — no  archiepiscopal  consent  would  have 
been  necessary.  As  the  matter  stands,  however,  it 
proves,  we  conceive,  the  existence,  at  the  time,  of 
a  conspiracy  between  the  Low-Church  archbishop 
and  the  Low-Church  priest,  for  imposing  on  the 
native  congregations,  not  the  Prayer-book  of  the 
Church  of  England,  but  one  which  had  been 
expurgated  on  Low-Church  lines,  as  far  as  Low- 
Churchmen  dared  to  expurgate  it.* 

And  every  now  and  then  the  idea  had  been  put 
forward  by  some  zealous  Protestant  that  the  Prayer- 
book  needed  revision  in  a  Protestant  direction.  As 
far  back  as  1844  a  proposal  had  been  put  forth  (by 
whom  does  not  appear)  for  such  a  revision  ;  which 
was  to  be  carried  out  "  somewliat  on  the  plan  pro- 
posed by  the  Eev.  John  Eiland,  in  a  work  entitled 
An  Attempt  towards  an  Analysis,  cj'c,  of  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer,  published  by  Hamilton  & 
Co."f      And  the  continuance  of  the  controversy 

*  Memoir  of  Henry  Venn,  B.D.,  new  edition,  London,  1882, 
p.  197.     For  a  kindred  plot,  see  above,  p.  81. 

t  Browne's  Annals  of  the  Tractarian  Movement,  p.  128. 


with,  the  Tract arians  had  made  Low- Churchmen 
feel  more  and  more  that  Tractarian  principles  were 
no  other  than  those  of  the  Prayer-book,  and  that 
as  long  as  the  Prayer-book  remained  intact,  so  long 
would  the  opponents  of  those  principles  find  it  an 
obstacle  in  their  way. 

In  the  year  1854  was  formed  the  Peayek-book 
Eevision  Society,  with  Lord  Eobert  Grosvenor, 
afterwards  Lord  Ebury,  for  its  President.  The 
objects  of  it  were  set  forth  as  follows  : — 

"  Priest. 

"  The  substitution  of  the  word  Minister  or  Presbyter  for  Priest, 
whenever  the  officiating  clergyman  is  intended. 

"  Ornaments'  Eubric. 

"  That  the  Rubric,  commonly  called  the  '  Ornaments'  Rubric,' 
be  expunged  from  the  Prayer-book,  and  some  plain  direction 

"  General  Rubrics. 

"  Such  alterations  as  may  avoid  undesirable  repetitions,  and 
make  the  Services  more  edifying  and  elastic.  A  revision  of  the 
Tables  and  Calendar. 

"  Athanasian  Creed. 

"  That  the  public  recitation  of  the  Athanasian  Creed  be  no 
longer  imperative. 

"  Communion  Service. 

"  Removal  of  &  few  phrases  which  have  been  alleged  to  favour 
Priestly  Confession  and  Absolution,  and  other  unscriptural  doc- 
trines and  errors. 

"  Baptismal  Offices. 

"  Removal  of  expressions  which  seem  to  assert  Spiritual  Regene- 
ration as  inseparahlij  connected  with  Baptism.  A  review  of  the 
Sponsorial  system.  The  Church  Catechism  and  Confirmation 
Service  to  be  in  harmony. 

"  Ordinal  and  Visitation. 

"  The  authoritative  form  of  words  accompanying  the  imposition 
of  hands  {Beceive,  dc.)  to  be  rendered,  as  in  primitive  times  and 


through  long  ages,  in  the  language  of  Prayer.  The  clause  '  Whose 
sins  thou  dost  forgive,'  &c.,  in  the  Ordinal,  and  the  corresponding 
Absolution  '  I  absolve  thee  '  in  the  Visitation  of  the  Sick,  to  be 

"  Marriage  Service. 

"  The  alteration  or  omission  of  some  passages  at  present  unsuited 
for  public  reading. 

"  Burial  of  the  Dead. 

"  Modification  of  Rubric  respecting  those  who  die  unha/ptizedy 
and  of  expressions  which  seem  to  imply  the  salvation  of  every  one 
over  whom  the  service  is  performed. 

"  Commination. 
"  Omission  of  the  Curses  and  accompanying  Exhortations." 

The  Prayer-book  Eevision  Society  soon  included 
the  Eev.  Eichard  Bingham,  Incumbent  of  Queen- 
borough  in  Kent,  the  Eev.  J.  N.  Simpkinson, 
Eector  of  Brington  in  Northamptonshire,  and  the 
Eev.  T.  D.  H.  Battersby,  Perpetual  Curate  of  St. 
John's,  Keswick,  in  Cumberland,  whom  Bishop 
Waldeo-rave  made  a  Canon  of  Carlisle  :  all  of  whom 
had  declared  their  unfeigned  assent  and  consent  to 
all  and  everything  contained  and  prescribed  in  and 
by  the  Prayer-book,  and  all  of  whom  held  their 
several  livings  on  the  good  faith  of  that  declara- 

About  the  year  1859  the  desire  for  revision 
broke  out  into  still  more  public  expression.  We 
have  now  before  us  a  pamphlet  by  the  Eev.  John 
Carysfort  Proby,  Eector  of  St.  Peter's,  Cheesehill, 
Winchester,  uncle  to  the  present  writer,  and  who, 
some  years  before,  had  submitted  to  be  dipped  in 
the  river  Itchen  by  an  Anabaptist  minister,  and  had 
thus  incurred  a  three  years'  suspension.  In  this 
pamphlet,  which   is  a  letter  to  his  diocesan,  Mr. 

REV.    J.    C.    PROBY    ON    REVISION.  95 

Proby  laid  down  as  the  first  thing  to  be  particnlarly 
attended  to  the  necessity  of  a  carefnl  revision  of 
the  prominent  doctrine  of  the  Liturg}-,  and  a  careful 
removal  from  every  part  of  the  Liturgy  of  what- 
ever was  found  in  any  way  to  militate  against  the 
true  and  sincere  and  apostolic  doctrine  of  the  New 
Testament.  And  to  the  question,  What  is  this 
peculiar  doctrine  of  the  Liturgy  ?  he  replied  with- 
out hesitation,  Baptismal  Regeneration:  the  doc- 
trine that  all  baptized  members  of  the  Church  of 
England  are  so  sufficient^  born  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
at  their  infant  baptism  as  to  become  members  of 
Christ,  children  of  God,  and  heirs  of  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  :  which  doctrine,  said  he,  had  no  Divine 
authority,  but  was  "a  tradition  of  the  Fathers, 
revived  in  the  Church  of  England,  and  not  known 
elseivhere''  (!!!). 

The  same  author  spoke,  in  a  subsequent  part  of 
his  pamphlet,  against  the  doctrine,  implied  in  the 
Collect  for  the  first  Sunday  after  Trinity,  that  we 
can  please  God  by  keeping  His  commandments. 
He  also,  however,  held  his  living  on  the  ground  of 
a  professed  assent  and  consent  to  all  and  every- 
thing contained  and  prescribed  in  and  by  the 

In  the  following  year  (1860)  there  appeared  a 
more  bulky  pamphlet,  entitled.  Thoughts  on  the 
Liturgy :  the  difficulties  of  an  honest  and  conscien- 
tious use  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  considered 
as  a  loud  and  reasonable  call  for  the  onlij  remedy, 
Revision.  This  also  w^as  by  a  beneficed  clergj^man, 
the  Eev.  Philip  Gell,  Minister  of  St.  John's,  Derby. 
He  commenced  by  calling  his  readers'  attention  to 

96  REV.    p.    GELL    ON    REVISIOX. 

what  he  terms  the  remarkable  and  important  fact 
that  within  no  great  distance  of  time  four  leading 
heresies,  with  other  errors,  had  forced  themselves 
on  the  attention  of  the  members  of  the  Church  of 
Eno^land,  so  as  to  be  thouo-ht  deservinfy  of  the  most 
serious  and  authoritative  counter-action  :  and  then 
specifying  these  four  heresies  as  (1)  Auricular  con- 
fession and  priestly  absolution,  (2)  the  supposition 
of  power  to  give  the  Holy  Ghost  by  episcopal  hands 
to  every  ordained  priest,  (3)  the  doctrine  of  the 
Eeal  Presence  in  the  Holy  Eucharist,  and  (4)  that 
of  Baptismal  Eegeneration,  he  adds  :  "  It  cannot 
well  he  denied  that  our  ecclesiastical  formularies 
are  the  real  ground  from  which  their  origin  has 
been  derived."  The  same  line  was  taken  by  the 
Hon.  and  Eev.  E.  V.  Bligh,  Vicar  of  Birhng,  who 
wrote  to  the  Earl  of  Derby  (then  Premier)  on  the 
Roots  of  Ritualism  and  their  remedy  :  the  remedy 
being,  accordinej  to  him,  the  excision  from  the 
Prayer-book  of  certain  words  "  derived  from 
Popery  of  the  darkest  ages."     This  was  in  1867. 

"  Often,  very  often,  it  is  true  "  (we  quote  the 
words  of  one  of  these  writers,  speaking  of  the  sub- 
scriptions required  of  candidates  for  Holy  Orders 
and  of  candidates  for  admission  to  curacies  or 
benefices),  "  there  must  have  been  a  carelessness  in 
such  subscription,  and  an  elasticity  of  conscience — 
as  I  am  sure  there  was  in  myself — very  hard  to  be 
given  a  good  account  of."  We  should  rather  have 
said  "  impossible  to  be  given  a  good  account  of." 
Mr.  Gell  and  Mr.  Bligh  had  simply  put  their  hands 
to  a  falsehood.  They  had  solennily  professed  as- 
sent to  certain  theological  statements  from  which 


they  dissented  in  their  hearts.  When  they  had 
been  ordained  to  the  deaconship  and  priesthood, 
and  when  they  had  been  admitted  to  their  several 
curacies,  it  had  been,  in  each  case,  on  the  ground 
of  a  subscription  solemnly  made,  that  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer  contained  in  it  nothing  contrary 
to  the  Word  of  God.  And  when  they  had  been 
admitted  to  their  respective  benefices,  it  had  been 
on  the  ground  of  a  still  more  stringent  declaration, 
that  of  unfeigned  assent  and  consent  to  all  and 
everything  contained  and  prescribed  in  and  by  the 
said  Book.  It  is  not  indeed  possible,  in  our  view, 
to  justify  the  imposition  of  a  subscription,  in  such 
terms,  in  reference  to  any  merely  human  composi- 
tion. There  are,  indeed,  as  everybody  knows, 
forms  of  expression  in  common  use  amongst  us 
which,  taken  by  themselves,  are  not  literally  true. 
Any  reader  of  these  pages  may  have  oftentimes 
ended  a  letter  with  the  words,  "  I  have  the  honour 

to  be.  Sir,  your  most  obedient  servant, ,"  and 

yet  not  only  have  never  dreamt  of  entering  his  cor- 
respondent's service  in  any  capacity  whatever,  but 
have  professed,  in  the  very  letter  which  he  was 
finishing,  an  intention  of  doing  the  very  opposite 
to  what  his  correspondent  had  desired.  Any 
reader  of  these  pages,  if  a  resident  at  any  time  in 
London,  may  have  directed  a  servant  to  say  "  Not 
at  home  "  to  any  visitor,  and  have  given  that  direc- 
tion without  any  the  slightest  intention  of  stirring 
out  of  the  house.  Nor  is  there  anything  morally 
wrong  in  the  very  least  degree  in  either  of  these 
cases,  because  the  expressions  in  question  are  re- 
cognised in  general  society  as  having,  under  the 
II.  8 


circumstances,  different  meanings  from  what  they 
have  when  taken  by  themselves  alone.  The  phrase 
"  I  have  the  honour  to  be,"  &c.,  means  no  more 
than  "  Being,  as  I  am,  so  and  so,  I  wish  to  pay 
you  all  the  respect  due  to  you  in  your  position." 
The  phrase  "  Not  at  home "  means,  in  London, 
"  Not  wishing  to  see  any  visitors."  And  so  it 
might  perhaps  be  argued,  and  maybe  not  unrea- 
sonably, with  regard  to  the  stringent  subscription 
required  of  candidates  for  benefices  by  the  Act  of 
Uniformity,  that  no  one  understands  it  in  the  strictly 
literal  sense,  and  therefore,  that  in  making  it  in 
a  somewhat  relaxed  sense  one  is  not  necessarily 
ofuiltv  of  anv  real  untruthfulness.  The  case,  how- 
ever,  of  those  Low-Church  clergymen  who  sought 
to  revise  the  Prayer-book  on  the  lines  indicated  by 
the  Prayer-book  Eevision  Society  was  not  such  as 
this.  What  they  wanted  was,  not  the  change  of  a 
rubric  for  one  more  practical — not  the  alteration 
of  an  expression  for  one  less  antiquated  and  ob- 
solete— not  the  rectification  of  a  phrase  wrongly 
translated  from  St.  Paul — not  the  enlargement  of  the 
Prayer-book  on  its  own  lines  by  the  insertion  of 
additional  forms  for  fast  or  festival,  or  of  additional 
ofiices  for  which  as  yet  no  fully  authorised  provi- 
sion had  been  made,  though  their  need  might  be 
generally  acknowledged— no  !  what  these  Eevision- 
ists  wanted  was  the  implied  surrender,  by  the 
Church  of  England,  of  certain  doctrines  expressed 
in  the  Prayer-book,  but  which  these  Eevisionists 
did  not  believe.  Having  been  allowed,  through  the 
imperfection  of  ecclesiastical  discipline,  to  expatiate 
within  the  limits  of  error,  they  wanted  the  land- 


mark  removed,  that  they  might  teach  the  error 
with  easy  consciences.  Sad  evidence  of  a  per- 
verted moral  sense !  for  how  could  even  a  Divine 
enactment  make  a  falsehood  once  told  to  have  been 
then  no  falsehood  at  all  ?  How  could  a  new  law 
concerning  the  admission  to  livings  in  July  absolve 
a  man  from  the  charge  of  untruthfulness  if  he  had 
received  his  benefice  on  false  pretences  in  June  ? 

Nor  was  the   case  materially  altered  when  the 
terms  of  subscription  were  changed  by  Act  of  Par- 
liament in  1863,  for  the  subscription  required  then 
was  still  such  as  to  exclude  all  in  honesty  who  dis- 
believed any  doctrine  of  the  Prayer-book  ;  and  he 
who  denied  Baptismal  Eegeneration,  or  the  validity 
of  priestly   Absolution,  was  just  as  dishonest  in 
making  the  new  subscription  as  he  would  have  been 
had  he  made  the  one  imposed  by  the  Act  of  1660. 
Although,  however,  the   Prayer-book   Eevision 
Society  continued  to  exist,  and  continued  to  enrol 
-among  its  members  every  now  and  then  a  Low- 
Church  clergyman  here  and  there,  yet  the  agitation 
soon  went  down.     Towards  the  end  of  1859  a  me- 
morial was  issued,    with  the    signatures  of  Low^- 
Churchmen  and  High-Churchmen  alike,  and  depre- 
cating all  change  in  the  Liturgj",  on  the  ground 
that  in   the    opinion  of  the  signers  the  time  for 
change  was  not  yet  come.     It  was  generally  felt, 
too,  that  to  join  the  Eevisionists   while   keeping  a 
benefice  or  a  curacy  was  to  compromise  one's  own 
truthfulness  ;    and  on  this  account   those  who  in 
their  hearts  desired  to  exclude  Catholics  from  the 
Church  of  England,  by  revising  the  Prayer-book, 
were  henceforward  content  for   the   most   part  to 



seek  the  accomplishment  of  their  desires  in  other- 
ways,  and  to  pose  as  faithful  children  of  the  Church, 
maintaining  the  Prayer-book  in  its  integrity,  with 
only  a  little  laxity  in  some  points  never  as  yet  made 
matter  of  question  in  a  court  of  law,  and  prose- 
cuting those  who  seemed  to  go  one  whit  beyond  its^ 
requirements.  In  the  month  of  May  1860,  Lord 
Ebury  renewed  in  the  House  of  Lords  a  motion 
brought  in  by  him  before  for  the  Protestant  revi- 
sion of  the  Prayer-book,  but  was  opposed  by  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (Dr.  Sumner).  The 
Bishop  of  London  (Dr.  Tait)  also  intimated  that 
even  then  a  clergyman  might  omit  part  of  the  ser- 
vices with  his  Bishop's  sanction,  inasmuch  as  a 
late  Act  forbade  the  law  to  be  put  in  operation 
against  a  clergyman  for  such  an  offence  without  his 
Bishop's  sanction. 

What  means  were  adopted  for  the  purpose  of 
workincf  Catholics  and  Catholicism  out  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  how  far  they  were  suc- 
cessful, will  be  seen  hereafter. 

It  may  be  convenient  here  to  notice  that  in  the 
year  1861  the  Colonial  Church  and  School  Society 
changed  its  name  to  "  The  Colonial  and  Continental 
Church  Society,"  a  large  part  of  its  operations 
being  now  directed  to  the  providing  of  Low-Church 
clergymen  to  officiate  on  the  Continent  as  chaplains 
to  English  residents  and  tourists  there.  These 
chaplains,  we  believe,  fulfilled  for  the  most  part 
their  appointed  task  diligently  and  faithfully — the 
task  of  misrepresenting  the  Church  of  England 
to  the  Continental  Churches  in  respect  both  of 
doctrine  and  of  ritual. 



Polemical  Period,  continued.    Riots  at  St.  George's-in-the-East. 

"Thou  that  abhorrest  idols,  dost  thon  commit  sacrilege?" — 
EoMANS  ii.  22. 

We  have  now  the  pain  and  the  shame,  both  as 
Enghshmen  and  as  Christians,  of  recording  a  set  of 
outrages,  not  indeed,  alas  !  entirely  unprecedented, 
but  never  before,  we  believe,  perpetrated  on  so 
large  a  scale  since  the  restoration  of  the  Church 
and  the  hierarchy  after  the  rule  of  Oliver  Crom- 
well, and  perhaps  never  at  all :  outrages  in  which 
some  Low-Churchmen  were  implicated,  and  which 
were  encouraged,  in  Low-Church  interest,  by  the 
Government.  We  allude  to  the  sacrilegious  riots 
in  the  church  of  St.  George's-in-the-East,  London, 
The  parish  of  St.  George's-in-the-East  was  (and 
perhaps  still  is)  one  of  the  worst  in  London  in 
point  of  morality.  It  abounded  with  boarding- 
houses  for  sailors,  and  with  all  the  low  public- 
houses,  dancing-saloons,  and  other  haunts  which 
a  seafaring  population  always  originates.  Li  the 
year  1857  or  1858  a  careful  survey  was  made, 
under  the  auspices  of  the  East  London  Association, 
of  a  district  immediately  surrounding  the  parish 
church,  and  containing  in  all  733  houses.  Of 
these  733  houses,  twenty-seven  were  public-houses, 
thirteen  were  beer-houses,  and  154  were  houses  of 
iU-fame.  The  entire  population  of  the  parish,  for 
whose  spiritual  teaching  the  Eector  was  respon- 
sible,   was    originally  forty-five    thousand.      This 

102  REV.   BRYAN   KING. 

enormous  number  was  afterwards  reduced,  first 
to  thirty  thousand,  and  then  to  twenty-seven 

In  November  1842  the  Eev.  Bryan  Khig,  for- 
merly Fellow  of  Brasenose  College,  Oxford,  was 
instituted  to  the  Eectory  of  St.  George's-in-the- 
East,  on  the  nomination  of  his  college.  In  the 
course  of  his  incumbency  he  commenced  various 
alterations  in  the  established  ecclesiastical  routine 
of  the  parisli,  and  in  due  time  there  not  only  was 
a  daily  evening  service  at  the  church,  but  there 
were  also  two  celebrations  of  the  Holy  Eucharist 
every  Sunday — one  at  8  a.m.,  and  the  other  after 
the  forenoon  prayers,  which  commenced  at  eleven. 
The  surplice  also  appears  to  have  been  worn  in  the 
pulpit — at  all  events,  at  the  sermon  in  the  fore- 

These  changes  earned  for  the  new  Eector  not 
only  unpopularity,  but  great  hostility.  Large 
public  meetings  were  held,  at  which  violent  re- 
solutions were  passed  :  these  resolutions  were  then 
circulated,  in  print,  through  the  parish :  and  all 
other  available  means  were  employed  for  bringing 
public  odium  to  bear  upon  Mr.  Bryan  King,  and 
to  thwart  him  in  his  work.  All  the  ordinary 
supplies  for  conducting  Divine  Service  were  with- 
held. The  church  clock  was  stopped.  The  salaries 
of  the  church  servants  were  suspended,  the  or- 
ganist being  only  paid  his  salary  on  the  express 
condition  of  his  refusing  to  discharge  the  duties  of 
his  office.  In  spite  of  all  this,  Mr.  Bryan  King 
persevered  in  his  efforts  for  the  glory  of  God  and 
the  spiritual  good  of  the  parish. 

ornaments'  rubric.  103 

It  is  to  be  remarked  here  that  when  the  Judicial 
Committee  of  the  Privy  Council  were  deciding  tlie 
suit  concerning  the  ornaments  and  furniture  of  St. 
Paul's,  Knightsbridge,  and  St.  Barnabas's,  Pimlico, 
they  uttered  the  following  pronouncement : — "  The 
rubric  to  the  Prayer-book  of  January  1,  1604, 
adopts  the  language  of  the  rubric  of  Elizabeth. 
The  rubric  to  the  present  Prayer-book  adopts  the 
language  of  the  statute  of  Elizabeth  (1  Eliz.  cap.  2) : 
but  they  all  obviously  mean  the  same  thing — that 
the  same  dresses  and  the  same  utensils  or  articles 
which  were  used  under  the  first  Pra3Tr-book  of 
Edward  VI.  may  stiU  be  used."  The  rubric  of 
that  Prayer-book  ran  thus  : — "  Upon  the  day  and 
at  the  time  appointed  for  the  ministration  of  the 
Holy  Communion,  the  priest  that  shall  execute  the 
holy  ministry  shall  put  upon  him  the  vesture  ap- 
pointed for  that  ministration,  that  is  to  say,  a  white 
alb  plain,  with  a  vestment  or  cope."  ("  Vestment," 
it  will  be  remembered,  means  chasuble.)  Just  after 
the  delivery  of  the  judgment  one  of  the  Judicial 
Lords  remarked  to  a  friend,  "We  have  just  given  the 
clergy  authority  to  wear  the  Eucharistic  vestments 
if  they  like.  It  is  to  be  hoped  they  w^on't  find  it 
out."  *  The  clergy,  however,  did  find  it  out.  The 
Eev.  Thomas  Chamberlain,  Vicar  of  St.  Thomas's, 
Oxford,  was  the  first  to  act  upon  it ;  f  and  he  en- 
countered, in  so  doing,  no  opposition  at  all  on  the 

*  Church  Times  of  April  4,  1884  (second  leading  article). 

t  Mr.  Chamberlain  put  on  a  red  chasuble  on  Easter  Day,  1851. 
His  congregation  had  already  been  accustomed  to  see  Oxford  hoods 
worn  of  extravagant  dimensions.  This  was  stated  by  the  Eev. 
James  Skinner,  in  a  letter  to  the  Eev.  Henry  Montagu  Villiers, 
Incumbent  of  St.  Paul's,  Knightsbridge  (p.  5,  note). 

104  REV.    HUGH   ALLEN, 

part  of  his  parishioners.  In  1857  or  thereabouts 
the  Eucharistic  vestments  were  presented  to  Mr. 
Bryan  King,  and  their  use  urged  upon  him  by 
several  members  of  his  congregation :  thereupon 
he  commenced  wearing  them  at  the  early  Eucharist. 

St.  George's-in-the-East  is  one  of  those  churches 
where  the  parishioners  or  vestry  have  the  power 
of  nominating  a  Lecturer  independently  of  the  In- 
cumbent. In  these  cases,  the  Lecturer,  having  been 
duly  elected,  and  also  licensed  by  the  Bishop,  fulfils 
his  ministry  in  the  church  at  such  times  as  the 
Incumbent  may  allow.  His  stipend  is  derived 
from  the  foundation  of  the  benefactor ;  like  the 
stipends  of  those  chantry-priests  of  whom  there 
were  so  many  in  England  in  the  times  just  before 
the  Eeformation.  Now  it  so  happened  that  the 
Lectureship  of  St.  George's-in-the-East  fell  vacant 
in  September  1858.  The  electors  were  the  mem- 
bers of  vestry,  who  had  themselves  been  elected 
by  the  inhabitants  of  the  whole  parish  under  the 
provisions  of  the  Metropolitan  Local  Management 
Act.  The  popular  candidate  was  the  Eev.  Hugh 
Allen.  In  favour  of  him  inflammatory  placards 
were  circulated  through  the  parish,  calling  upon 
the  parishioners  to  vindicate  their  own  Protest- 
antism b}^  procuring  Mr.  Allen's  election.  Memo- 
rials to  the  vestry  were  also  numerously  signed, 
begging  that  Mr.  Allen  might  be  elected.  These 
measures  were  successful,  Mr.  Allen  being  elected 
Lecturer  on  the  31st  of  March,  1859. 

The  Eector  now  interposed.  Mr.  Allen  stood 
(says  Mr.  Bryan  King)  almost  alone  among  the 
clergy  of  that  district  of  London  for  the  extrava- 


gance  of  his  tenets  in  the  direction  of  Puritanism. 
He  had  in  the  previous  December  taken  part  with 
the  friends  of  the  Eev.  C.  H.  Spurgeon,  the  well- 
known  Anabaptist  preacher,  in  a  public  meeting, 
and  had  there  advocated  the  collection  of  funds 
for  the  purpose  of  erecting  Mr.  Spurgeon's  "  Metro- 
politan Tabernacle."  And  about  four  years  pre- 
viously he  had,  through  his  conduct  when  Lecturer 
of  St.  Luke's,  Old  Street,  given  great  public  scandal, 
and  been  compelled  to  resign  that  Lectureship.  On 
these  grounds  Mr.  Bryan  King  now  wrote  to  the 
Secretary  of  the  Bishop  of  London,  protesting 
against  Mr.  Allen's  being  licensed  to  the  Lecture- 
ship. The  letter  was  received  on  the  loth  of 
May  :  but  (strange  to  sa}^),  without  communicating 
with  Mr.  Bryan  King,  the  Bishop  (Dr.  Tait)  granted 
Mr.  Allen  his  licence  two  days  later. 

Then  was  commenced  that  series  of  disturbances 
and  outrages  which  continued,  with  an  interval  or 
two,  for  many  months.  On  the  Sunday  follow- 
ing his  reception  of  the  licence,  Mr.  Allen,  with 
the  open  support  of  the  churchwardens,  entered 
the  church,  at  about  twenty  minutes  before  the 
usual  afternoon  Litany  and  catechising,  amid 
shouts  of  "  Bravo,  Allen  !  "  and,  in  spite  of  the 
protest  of  the  Curate  in  charge  (Mr.  Bryan  King 
being  then  absent  from  home),  proceeded  to  read 
the  Litany.  He  then  mounted  the  pulpit,  and, 
brandishing  there  in  his  hand  the  Bishop's  licence, 
was  greeted  with  repeated  shouts  of  applause. 
Owing  to  the  threatening  aspect  of  the  crowds  in 
the  precincts  of  the  church,  no  attempt  was  made 
on  the  following  Sunday  to  offer  the  usual  Sunday 

106  ST.  George's- IN -THE-EAST. 

afternoon  service  ;  but  on  tlie  5tli  of  June,  as 
soon  as  the  cliurcli  was  opened  for  the  Litany 
service,  it  was  filled  with  the  mob  ;  and  on  the 
entrance  of  the  choir  and  clergy  the  hooting  and 
shouting  was  so  great  that  no  service  could  be 
rendered,  and  it  was  not  without  difficulty  that  the 
clergy  and  choir  escaped  violence.  The  Eector 
was  supported  in  the  evening  by  several  neigh- 
bouring rectors  and  other  clergy,  who  felt  that  the 
cause  was  not  now  so  much  that  of  Protestant- 
ism against  Catholicism  as  of  ungodliness  against 
Christianity.  But  the  outrages  were  repeated,  and 
it  was  with  difficulty  that  Mr.  Bryan  King  was 
rescued  by  his  friends  and  several  policemen  from 
an  attack  of  the  mob.  Partly  in  consequence 
hereof,  and  partly  because  the  Chief  Commissioner 
of  Police  had  refused  to  allow  the  poUce  to  act 
within  the  church,  the  sacred  building  was  par- 
tially closed  on  the  two  following  da}'S. 

Meanwhile  the  vestry  had  applied  to  the  Court 
of  Queen's  Bench  for  a  mandamus  ordering  the 
Ptector  to  admit  Mr.  Allen  into  his  pulpit.  But 
the  court  decided  that  Mr.  Allen's  act  on  the  22nd 
of  May  was  an  intrusion,  and  that  whenever  the 
Eector  chose  to  preach  Mr.  Allen  must  give  way ; 
but  suggesting  that  Mr.  Allen  should  be  allowed 
to  celebrate  a  service  of  his  own  on  Sunday  after- 
noons, after  the  service  which  had  been  conducted 
under  the  Eector.  Mr.  Bryan  King  hereupon 
offered  Mr.  Allen  the  use  of  the  church  at  five 
o'clock  in  the  evening ;  but  this  being  deemed  in- 
convenient to  Mr.  Allen  and  his  hearers,  his  service 
was  allowed  to  precede  the  Eector's,  and  to  com- 


mence  at  a  quarter-past  two  o'clock.      Under  this 
arrangement  Mr.  Allen  officiated  on  the  29tli  of 
June,  and  (as  a  local  reporter  averred)  "  did  not 
forget  that  he  stood  in  the  pulpit  of  a  Puseyite 
Eector,  and  was  appointed  in  antagonism  to  him. 
He  found  occasion  therefore  to  dwell  repeatedly, 
and  in  a  marked  manner,  on  disputed  doctrines, 
and   pomp    and    ceremony,   troops    of    choristers 
and  Eitualism,  as  being  opposed  to  '  the  everlast- 
ing Gospel'  "  *     Thus  excited,  about  two  or  three 
hundred  of  Mr.  Allen's  hearers,  after  Mr.  Allen's 
sermon  was  over,  remained  in  the  church,  and  took 
possession  of  the  stalls  in  the  choir  for  the  purpose 
of  preventing  the  Eector's  service  from  being  held, 
in  which  object  tliej^  succeeded.     The  same  thing 
was  done  on  the  following  Sunday.     The  Eector 
then  intimated  to  Mr.  Allen,  through  a  solicitor, 
that  if  the  four  o'clock  service  was  hindered  ao-ain, 
he  would  require  Mr.  Allen's   service  to  be  held 
after  it  instead  of  before  ;  and  Mr.  Allen's  hearers, 
by  the  personal  efforts  of  Mr.  Allen  himself  and 
one  of  the  churchwardens,  were  induced,  on  the 
following  Sunday,  to  leave  when  his   sermon  was 
over.     "  And  thus,"  said  Mr.  Bryan  King,  "  I  was 
permitted  to  conduct  my  afternoon  service  in  com- 
parative freedom   from   disturbance  :  "  though,   it 
may  be  added,  on  the  authority  of  a  letter  from 
Mr.  Bryan  King  himself  to  the    Guardian  news- 
paper, he  had  many  anonymous  letters  threatening 
that,  unless  he  allowed  Mr.  Allen  to  preach  at  the 

*  East  London  Observer  for  July  2,  1859,  cited  in  the  Eev. 
Bryan  King's  letter  of  remonstrance  to  the  Lord  Bishop  of  London, 
entitled  Sacrilege  and  its  Encouragement,  p.  17,  note. 

108  ST.  george's-in-the-east. 

four  o'clock  service,  lie  slioiild  never  be  permitted 
to  liold  tliat  service  without  disturbance. 

This    comparative   freedom,    however,    did   not 
long   continue,  and  on  the  14th   of  August   the 
mob  took  possession  of  the  choir  stalls,  and  inter- 
rupted the  Litany  with  hisses  and  shouts.     And 
when  in  the  middle  of  the  service  the  officiating 
curate  (the  Eev.  W.  P.  Burn)  fell  down  in  a  fit, 
one  of  the  rioters  exclaimed,  "  It  is  a  judgment 
of  God  upon  him  ;  God  has  struck  him  down  :  down 
with  Bryan  King  !  "     After  the  service  a  cry  was 
raised,  "  Let  us  attack  the  choir-boys  !  "  some  six 
or  eight  of  whom  had  taken  refuge  in  the  bap- 
tistery from  the  mob.    Some  of  the  Eector's  friends, 
on  hearing  this,  placed  themselves  outside  the  bap- 
tistery door  in  order  to  guard  it ;  and  in  defending 
their  position  there,  one  of  them  struck  with  his 
umbrella  one  of  the  ringleaders  of  the  mob  upon 
his  hat,  which  the  fellow,  it  seems,  was  wearing. 
The  blow  was  returned.     The  churchwardens  pro- 
secuted  the    Eector's   friend,    and    defended   the 
original   aggressor ;    and   their   expenses   in   that 
matter  were  subsequently  paid  by  the  vestry.     And 
matters  went  on  in  this  way  for  weeks  and  weeks 
together,  Mr.  Bryan  King  assenting,  on  the  Bishop's 
recommendation,  to  Mr.  Allen's  holding  his  service 
at  half-past  three  o'clock  ;  and  further,  consenting 
to  face  eastwards  no  longer,  as  he  had  been  wont 
to   do   at   the  ascription  of  Glory  wherewith  the 
sermons  were  concluded.     This  arrangement  was 
put  in  practice  on  Sunday,  the  6tli  of  November. 
But  if  the  Bishop  imagined  that  the  disturbances 
were  about  to  cease  on  account  thereof,  the  event 


proved  his  utter  mistake.  The  morning  service 
was  seriously  interrupted,  the  Litany  at  a  quarter 
before  three  still  more  so  :  to  attempt  offering  the 
evening  service  was  deemed  unadvisable.  The 
presence,  however,  of  a  force  of  police  within  the 
church  caused  some  restraint  upon  the  mob,  and 
the  interruptions  became  less  and  less  serious 
until  Sunday,  the  1st  of  January,  1860,  on  which 
day  it  had  been  announced  by  placards  the  Eev. 
Hugh  Allen  would  officiate  in  St.  George's  Church 
for  the  last  time.  That  gentleman,  it  seems,  had 
been  appointed  to  the  Eectory  of  St.  George  the 
Martyr,  Southwark,  on  the  Lord  Chancellor's  pre- 
sentation, and  to  the  Wednesday  Lectureship  of 
St.  Olave's,  Jewry.  Unfortunately,  in  spite  of  the 
remonstrances  of  Mr.  Bryan  King  with  the  Home 
Secretary  (Sir  George  C.  Lewis,  Bart.)  and  the  Chief 
Commissioner  of  Police  (Sir  Eichard  Mayne),  the 
attendance  of  police  at  St.  George's-in-the-East 
had  been  suddenly  withdrawn ;  and  from  that  day 
and  onwards  the  disturbances  increased  at  the 
afternoon  and  evening  services,  until  on  the  5th 
of  February  "  the  whole  service  was  interrupted 
by  hissing,  whistling,  and  shouting.  Several  songs 
were  roared  out  by  many  united  voices  during  the 
reading  of  the  lessons  and  the  preaching  of  the 
sermon ;  hassocks  were  thrown  down  from  the 
galleries  ;  and  after  the  service,  cushions,  hassocks, 
and  books  were  hurled  at  the  altar  and  its  furni- 
ture." * 

The  worst  feature,  however,  in  this  sad  history 
is  the  complicity  of  the  authorities  with  the  sacri- 

*  Sacrilege  and  its  Encouragement,  p.  23. 

110  ST.  george's-in-the-east. 

lesfious  rioters.  If  Mr.  Bryan  Kino;  had  been  cor- 
rectly  informed,  it  was  a  commonly  used  expression, 
at  meetings  of  the  "  Anti-Puseyite  Leasrue,"  in  re- 
ference  to  any  pending  prosecution,  "  Oil,  the 
magistrates  dare  not  conyict."  Those  magistrates 
were  Messrs.  Yardley  and  Selfe — the  latter  Dr. 
Tait's  own  brother-in-law.  The  Home  Secretary 
not  only  refused  to  authorise  the  police  to  remoye 
from  the  church  persons  who  were  undoubtedly 
guilty  of  trespass,  and  who  had  desecrated  the 
church  by  acts  of  reyolting  impiety,  but  would 
not  allow  the  police  to  take  rioters  into  custody 
when  called  upon  by  the  Rector  himself. 

Nor  was  the  profane  uproar  the  only  way  in 
which  this  unhappy  church  was  desecrated.  Wlien 
the  mob  began  to  take  possession  of  the  choir-stalls 
for  the  purpose  of  excluding  the  choir  and  clergy, 
the  Curate  in  charge  asked  the  Bishop  to  direct 
that  the  churchwardens  should  appropriate  those 
seats  to  the  clergy  and  choir,  but  the  Bishop  replied 
that  he  could  only  do  so  through  his  court.  After- 
wards, howeyer,  when  appealed  to  by  the  church- 
wardens, on  behalf  of  the  profane  and  riotous  mob, 
to  remoye  the  choir-stalls  altogether,  he  ordered 
them  himself,  without  any  reference  to  his  court, 
to  remoye  not  only  the  choir-stalls,  but  the  moye- 
able  cross  which  had  been  placed  upon  the  re-table 
and  the  sanctuary  hangings  ;  those  hangings  being 
the  very  same  which  he  had  previously  admitted 
to  Mr.  Bryan  King  were  unquestionably  legal,  and 
with  the  like  to  which,  he  added,  he  had  himself 
decorated  the  east  wall  of  Carlisle  Cathedral  when 
he  had  been  Dean  of  that  church.     Accordingly, 


on  Saturday,  the  lOtli  of  March,  the  churchwar- 
dens entered  the  church  along  with  carpenters  and 
others,  while  the  evening  service  was  proceeding, 
and  immediately  upon   its    conclusion  proceeded 
to  put  the  Bishop's  order  into   execution.     This, 
however,  was  not  until,  on  the  afternoons  of  two 
Sundays,  February   26   and  March  4,   a  number 
of  people  who  had  persisted  in  remaining  in  church 
from   about  4.40  p.m.,  when  the   afternoon  service 
concluded,  until  the  commencement  of  the  even- 
ing service  at  seven,  had  eaten  their  afternoon  meal 
in  the  choir-stalls,  pelted  the  hangings  behind  the 
altar  with  orange-peel  and  bread  and  butter,  and 
knocked  down  the  altar  cross  with  rods  of  stair- 
carpets  ;    nor   yet    until,  on    the    4th    of  March, 
one  of  the  altar  carpets  had  been  crammed  into  a 
large  stove,  and  one  person  had  made  use  of  a  pew 
for  the  filthiest  of  purposes.     On  Mr.  Bryan  King's 
informing  the  Home  Secretary  of  these  things,  and 
inquiring  whether  the  police   sergeant   had  been 
justified  in  his  refusal  to  remove  the  persons  offend- 
ing, he   received  no  more  than  a  bare  intimation 
that   the   letter   had    been   received.      Only    tw^o 
offenders,   on  being  prosecuted  for  creatino-   dis- 
turbances,   were   convicted;    and    violent  attacks 
were  made  upon  the  choir-boys,  both  in  church 
and  out  of  it.     At  last,  Mr.  Bryan  King,  being  for 
the    third   time    broken   down   in  health  by   the 
struggle  and  its  accompanying  anxieties,  left  the 
parish  in  July  1860,  on  a  year's  leave.     A  clergy- 
man of  the  name  of  Hansard  took  charge  in  his 
absence,  and  under  Mr.  Hansard's  regime  "  every 
mob-demand  "  (said  a  correspondent  of  the  Union) 


"  was  eagerly  conceded."  In  1863  Mr.  Bryan 
Kino-  resigned  the  living,  and  became  Eector  of 
Avebury,  a  village  in  Wiltshire. 

Nor  were  the  lessons  which  the  conduct  of  the 
authorities  had  taught  lost  upon  Protestants  in 
other  parts  of  London,  to  say  nothing  of  the 
country.  "  On  the  reopening  of  St.  Philip's,  Clerk- 
enwell,  January  26,"  says  Mr.  Bryan  King, 
"  several  of  the  St.  George's  rioters  were  present 
and  attempted  a  disturbance ;  but  the  church- 
wardens did  their  duty  and  immediately  ordered 
their  removal  by  the  police.  On  the  evening  of 
Sunday,  February  19,  several  of  the  rioters,  upon 
finding  my  church  re-occupied  by  the  police, 
adjourned  to  St.  Matthew's,  Fell  Street,  whilst  others 
of  them  went  to  the  Wesleyan  Chapel,  Back  Eoad, 
attempting  disturbances  in  both  places.  On  the 
very  same  Sunday  several  people  attempted  to 
create  a  disturbance  at  St.  Martin's  Church,  Liver- 
pool, by  calling  out  'No  Popery,'  threatening  to 
have  a  '  St.  Greorge's-in-the-East  row '  there.  And, 
strangely  enough,  on  the  evening  of  the  very  same 
Sunday,  several  people  attempted  a  disturbance  at 
St.  Andrew's  Church,  Halstead,  Essex,  by  throwing 
peas,  chestnut-husks,  and  orange-peel,  whilst  one 
man  took  a  lucifer  match  and  lighted  a  cigar.  For 
these  offences  summonses  were  taken  out  by  the 
churchwardens  at  the  magistrates'  court,  Halstead, 
February  23."* 

The  stains  of  these  proceedings  must  rest  in 
some  measure  upon  the  Low-Church  party.  It  is, 
no  doubt,  true,  as  asserted  by  the  Record  more 

•  Sacrilege  and  its  Encouragement,  p.  38,  note. 


than  twenty  years  after,  that  Mr.  Bryan  King  "  was 
persecuted  by  a  gang  of  ruffians  because  he  in- 
terfered with  their  traffic."  *  But  Protestantism 
was  the  cry  by  which  tlie  rioters  were  mustered : 
it  w^as  the  Low-Church  Lord  Ebury  who  presented 
a  petition  from  certain  parishioners  against  Mr. 
Bryan  King,  apparently  for  wearing  the  Eucharistic 
vestments ;  it  was  in  tlie  interests  of  the  Low- 
Church  party  that  Bishop  Tait  sjDoke  and  wrote. 
A  majority  of  tlie  rioters  may  very  probably  have 
been  persons  professing  no  religion  at  all ;  and  yet 
when  we  hear  of  canticles  and  hymns  being  sung 
by  many  of  the  congregation  at  Mr.  Allen's  ser- 
vice, we  see  at  once  that  to  those  "  many  "  such  a 
description  could  not  have  applied.  One  of  the 
letters  received  by  Mr.  Bryan  King  was  concluded 
in  the  following  terms — he  cites  it  as  an  instance 
of  many  of  a  similar  character  : — "  I  hereby  warn 
you  that  unless  you  desist  from  your  hellish  and 
Popish  practice  and  preaching  in  our  parish  church, 
I  shall  take  foul  means  to  prevent  your  doing  so  : 
the  proper  place  for  you  to  preach  in  is  H — 11, 
where  you  will  soon  be,  as  the  devil's  claws  are 
on  you  already.  ...  I  am  one  of  a  secret  society 
which  has  sworn  to  see  your  downfall. — I  am,  A 
PROTESTAXT."f  And  "  the  Puseyite  party  "  was  the 
appellation  commonly  given  in  the  parish  to  the 
Eector  and  those  who  sympathised  with  him,  while 
an  association  got  up  against  him  was  termed  "  the 
Anti-Puseyite  League."  Moreover,  we  can  have 
very  little  doubt  but  a  fear  of  offending  the  Low- 

*  Eecord,  December  8,  1882. 
t  Sacrilege  and  its  Encouragement,  p.  30,  note. 
II.  9 


Churcli  party  was  the  ruling  motive  wliich  the 
Government  had  in  taking  the  hne  which  they  did, 
shameful  as  that  line  was.  Further,  we  may  mark 
that  in  1863  the  Eev.  James  Hildyard,  Eector  of 
Ino-oldsby,  in  Lincolnshire,  wrote  thus  of  the  mob 
and  their  proceedings  : — "  From  this  cheerless  pros- 
pect the  so-called  '  lawless  and  irreligious  mob '  of 
St.  George's  has  (as  far  as  rests  with  them)  de- 
livered us  and  our  children.  And  if  they  have  not 
altogether  succeeded  in  their  object,  they  have 
effectually  prevented  the  triumph  of  their  oppo- 
nents, and  put  a  check,  wliich  will  be  long  re- 
membered, to  the  stealthy  progress  of  a  system 
which,  up  to  that  period,  was  rapidly  gaining 
ground  in  the  kingdom,  and  whose  ultimate  ten- 
dency is  to  assimilate  the  Protestant  worship  of 
our  churches  to  the  more  attractive  but  less 
spiritual  character  of  those  of  France,  Italy,  and 
Spain."  On  which  the  Christian  Observer  remarked  : 
"  We  cannot  go  with  him  to  that  length  ;  but,  in  the 
principle  which  the  parishioners  designed  to  assert, 
we  fully  join  with  them :  may  it  ever  be  courage- 
ously maintained !  "  And  then  the  Editor  proceeds 
to  quote  from  Mr.  Hildyard,  without  any  further 
disapj^rohation,  as  follows  : — "  No  Popery,  no  semi- 
Popery,  shall  be  tolerated  here.  These  men  are 
not  Puritans,  as  they  have  been  called ;  they  have 
no  more  sympathy  with  Geneva  than  they  have 
with  Eome.  What  they  want,  and  what  they  will 
have,  these  men  of  St.  George's-in-the-East — and 
with  them  concur  the  great  bulk  of  the  people  of 
Em^land — is  the  simple  Word  of  God  plainly  and 
intelligibly  delivered,  without  the  invention  or  the 


interpolation,   the    fancies  or  the    foUies  of  man. 
They  want,  in  short,  and  will  have,  religion,  not 
priestcraft — the    substance,  not   the  shadow — the 
spirit,  not  the  letter,  of  the  Gospel.     And  are  they 
for  this  to  be  branded  as  rioters,  as  disturbers  of 
the  peace,  outragers  of  the  sanctity  of  the  temple, 
profaners  of  the  worship  of  God  ?     I  trust  not."  * 
How  the  matter  was  regarded  by  the  Low-Church 
party  in  general  may  be  inferred  from  the  follow- 
ing utterance  of  the  same  periodical : — "  The  re- 
spectable church-going  people  of  England  will  not 
feel  that  justice  has  been  done   if  the  rioters   are 
punished  before  the  Eomish  exhiljitions  have  been 
suppressed.      They  are    afraid   that,  if  order   be 
restored,  Tractarianism  will  be  allowed  to  triumph 
in  St.  George's-in-the-East ;  and  of  two  fearful  evils 
they  prefer  the  least."  f 


Polemical  Period,  continued.  Rise  of  the  Broad-Church  Party. 
Its  Characteristics.  Line  taken  by  Low-Churchmen  against  it. 
Proceedings  against  Prof.  Jowett.  Attempt  against  Mr.  Maurice's 

"  Thy  wisdom  and  thy  knowledge,  it  hath  perverted  thee  ;  and 
thou  hast  said  in  thine  heart,  I  am,  and  none  else  beside  me." — 
Isaiah  xlvii.  10. 

From  the  physical  danger  caused  by  lawless  mobs 
encouraged  by  rulers  both  in  Church  and  in  State, 
we  turn  to  an  intellectual  and  spiritual  danger 
caused  by  false  teachers  ;  a  danger  which  threatened 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1867,  pp.  545,  546. 
t  li.  March,  1860,  p.  224. 



Higli-Churcli  principles  and  Low-Church  principles 
alike,  but  which  Low-Churchmen  were  least  com- 
petent to  resist. 

About  the  same  time  when  the  Tractarian  school 
in  Oxford  had  been  rising,  there  had  come  into  pro- 
minence a  school  of  a  different  character,  and  to 
which  the  name  of  "  Broad-Church  "  came  to  be 
given,  on  account  of  the  breadth  of  the  comprehen- 
siveness which  it  advocated.  And  yet  that  name  was 
a  misnomer.  From  the  time  when  the  party  arose 
under  Dr.  Arnold  of  Eugby,  and  those  like-minded 
with  him,  it  was  in  as  strong  opposition  to  the 
Ansflo-Catholic  revival  as  were  the  most  bigroted 
Low-Churchmen.  Comprehensiveness  for  every 
form  of  belief  except  Catholicism  — such  was  really 
the  object  at  which  the  party  aimed.  Dr.  Arnold 
thus  expressed  the  points  of  agreement  among 
Protestants,  as  he  supposed  them : — "  We  all 
believe  in  one  God,  a  spiritual  and  all-perfect 
Beinsf,  Who  made  us  and  all  thincfs,  Wlio  ijoverns 
all  things  by  His  Providence,  Wlio  loves  goodness 
and  abhors  wickedness ;  we  all  believe  that  Jesus 
Christ,  His  Son,  came  into  the  world  for  our  sal- 
vation ;  that  He  died,  and  rose  from  the  dead  to 
prove  that  His  true  servants  shall  not  die  eternally, 
but  shall  rise  as  He  is  risen,  and  enjoy  an  eternal 
life  wdth  Him  and  with  His  Father."*     By  which 

*  Principles  of  Church  Beform,  1833,  p.  29.  Dr.  Arnold 
added  :  "  We  all  believe  that  the  volnme  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments contains  the  revelation  of  God's  vi^iU  to  man  ;  that  no  other 
revelation  than  vfhaA,  is  there  recorded  has  been  ever  given  to  man- 
kind before  or  since :  that  it  is  a  standard  of  faith  and  a  rule  of 
practice,"  &c.  {ih.)  "  We  all  have,  with  very  few  exceptions,  the 
same  notions  of  right  and  wrong,"  &c.  {ih.  p.  30.) 


formulary,  if  it  had  ever  become  a  public  formu- 
lary, all  intelligent  authorities  would  have  been 
excluded  :  for  we  do  not  believe  that  our  blessed 
Lord  rose  from  the  dead  to  prove  anything  which 
was  to  be,  but  to  bring  in  for  mankind  a  principle 
of  life  which  had  never  been  enjoyed  before,  a 
spiritual  life,  in  the  power  of  which  those  who 
have  been  baptized  into  Him  are  enabled  now  to 
overcome  sin,  and  shall  be  enabled  hereafter  to 
overcome  death  as  well. 

Nor  was  the  party,  strictly  speaking,  a  religious 
party  at  all:  religious,  that  is,  with  Christian  religion 
Its  religion  was  a  natural  religion  and  nothing 
more.  The  present  writer,  visiting  a  cottager  once 
in  company  with  a  Broad-Church  clergyman,  was 
complimented  by  the  latter  on  having  preached 
the  Gospel  when  he  had  not  given  utterance  to  any 
religious  truth  at  all.  The  party  aimed  at  elevating 
and  benefiting  man  in  the  flesh  and  as  in  the  flesh ; 
not  as  regenerated  with  the  life  of  God  communi- 
cated through  Christ  in  Holy  Baptism.  The  ground 
they  took  up  was  the  common  ground  of  humanity  : 
very  good  and  proper  to  be  taken  up  if  they  had 
had  to  deal  with  heathens,  and  had  aimed  at 
civilisino-  them  and  no  more,  but  altocfether  wrono" 
ground  to  be  taken  by  those  whose  duty  was  to 
train  a  spiritual  life,  a  life  of  which,  so  far  as  we 
know,  none  partake  save  those  who  have  received 
the  sacrament  of  Christian  Baptism.  And  in  thus 
seeking  to  elevate  and  improve  their  fellow-men, 
they  had  regard  to  man's  intellect  rather  than  to  his 
spirit,  and  sought  to  train  and  improve  the  former 
Tather  than  the  latter.     With   them  the  intellect 


was  everything.  Once,  when  Archbishop  Wliately 
was  traveUing  abroad,  writes  a  son  of  Dr.  Arnold, 
who  was  then  of  the  Archbishop's  company,  as  the 
carriage  passed  "  nearly  all  the  people  at  work  in 
the  fields  by  the  roadside,  as  soon  as  they  caught 
sight  of  the  three-cornered  hat,  left  off  working 
and  went  down  on  their  knees,  doubtless  in 
hope  of  receiving  an  episcopal  benediction.  At 
the  little  town  of  Eotz,  as  the  Archbishop  was 
standing  in  the  street  while  the  horses  were  beinoj- 
changed,  a  wretched-looking  man  came  up,  threw 
himself  on  his  knees  in  the  mud  before  him,  and 
with  clasped  hands  and  in  supplicating  accents 
began  to  mumble  forth  entreaties  which  our  im- 
perfect  knowledge  of  German  did  not  permit  us 
to  understand.  The  Archbishop  looked  at  him 
askance,  and  with  anxious  eye,  as  if  he  were  some 
remarkable  phenomenon,  and  then  turned  abruptly 
away."*  Evidently  the  thought  never  occurred  to 
him  that  the  poor  man  could  be  benefited  spiritually 
by  a  benediction  the  words  of  which  he  did  not 
understand.  The  same  Archbishop  had  undertaken 
to  consecrate  a  church.  On  the  day  appointed 
he  mounted  his  horse  and  rode  to  the  building, 
where  a  congregation  and  several  clergy  had  as- 
sembled for  Divine  Service.  Having  dismounted, 
he  proceeded  at  once  to  the  altar,  riding-whip  in 
hand,  and,  all  unvested,  signed  the  deed  of  conse- 
cration, informed  the  astonished  assembly  that  that 
was  all  which  was  legally  necessary  for  the  act  of 
consecration,  and  rode  away. 

*  Life  and  Correspondence  of  Richard  Whately,  D.D.,    late 
Archbishop  of  Dublin  new,  edition,  London,  1868,  pp.  206-7. 


The  imspiritual  character  of  the  Broad-Church 
school  was  strikingly  exemplified  in  the  foUowino- 
account,  by  the  Eev.  Charles  Kingsley,  of  Abra- 
ham's calling  and  hopes  : — "  Let  us  see  how  God 
led  Abraham  on  .   .   .  to  look  for    a    city  which 
had  foundations  ;  in  short,  to  understand  what  a 
State  and  a  nation  means  and  ought  to  be."*     A 
State  and  a  nation  here  on  earth  :  that  is  all.     The 
passage  is  taken  from  a  volume  of  Village  Sermons. 
Towards  the  conclusion  of  the  same  discourse  the 
preacher  gives  his  view  of  the  object  for  which 
Anglican    congregations     are     gathered  : — "  This 
building  belongs  to  the  National  Church  of  Eng- 
land, and  we  worship  here,  not  merely  as  men,  but 
as  men  of  England,  citizens  of  a  Christian  country, 
come  to  learn  not  merely  how  to  save  ourselves, 
but  how  to  help  towards  the  saving  of  our  families, 
our   parish,   and  our   nation  ;    and,   therefore,   we 
must   know  what  a  country  and  a   nation   mean, 
and    what   is    the   meaning  of  that  glorious  and 
Divine  word,  '  a  citizen,'  that,  by  learning  what  it 
is   to  be  a  citizen  of  England,  we  may  go  on  to 
learn  fully  what  it  is  to  be  a  citizen  of  the  kingdom 
of  God."f     By  one  eminent  Broad-Church  writer, 
indeed,  the  terms   "  spiritual "   and  "  intellectual  " 
were  used  as  synonymous. :|:     And  how  utterly  the 
Christian's    standing   in    Christ   by   virtue  of  his 
Baptism  was  ignored  may  be  seen  by  what  Dr. 
Arnold,  about  the  time  of  his   going  to  Eugby, 

*  Tiventy-five  Village  Sermons,  1849,  p.  128. 
t  Ih.  pp.  187-8. 

X  See  Prof.  Jowett's  paper  in  Essays  and  Beviews,  12th  edition, 
p.  461. 


wrote  : — "  My  object  will  be,  if  possible,  to  form 
Christian  men,  for  Christian  boys  I  can  scarcely 
hope  to  make ;  I  mean  that,  from  the  natural  im- 
perfect state  of  boyhood,  they  are  not  susceptible 
of  Christian  principles  in  their  full  development 
upon  their  practice,  and  I  suspect  that  a  low 
standard  of  morals  in  many  respects  must  be 
tolerated  among  them,  as  it  was  on  a  larger  scale 
in  what  I  consider  the  boyhood  of  the  human 

The  tendency  of  the  Broad-Church  school  was, 
of  course,  to  ignore  the  supernatural :  and  thus,  in 
its  development,  its  adherents  were  found,  in  some 
cases,  to  deny  miracles,  prophecy,  and  the  special 
inspiration  of  the  writers  of  Holy  Scripture.  They 
took  up,  in  reference  to  prayers  for  a  change  of 
weather,  the  argument  used  by  infidels  against  all 
prayer  whatsoever  :  not  knowing  that  inasmuch  as 
the  Church  is  the  Body  of  Christ,  indwelt  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  inasmuch  as  the  Holy  Ghost  is 
one  in  Godhead  with  the  Father,  the  operations  of 
the  Father  in  the  material  creation  will  be  of  a  piece 
with  the  working  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  Church, 
and,  therefore,  if  the  Father  wills  to  order  the 
course  of  nature  in  any  particular  manner  for  the 
carrying  out  of  His  purpose  towards  His  people, 
the  Holy  Ghost  will  move  the  Church  to  make  such 
ordering  a  matter  of  prayer,  "  unto  Him  that  is 
able  to  do  exceeding  abundantly  above  all  that  we 

*  Arnold's  Life  and  Corresjjondence,  by  A.  P.  Stanley,  6th 
edition,  p.  449.  It  should  be  added  that  the  note  to  the  above 
passage  is,  "  See  Sermons,  vol.  ii.  p.  440."  His  later  sermons  and 
letters  seem  to  indicate  that  subsequently  this  opinion  would  not 
have  been  expressed  so  strongly. 


ask  or  think,  according  to  the  power  that  worketh 
m  us.  * 

Indeed,  of  theology,  properly  so  called,  the 
party  had  none.  Its  members  professed  to  hold 
Justification  by  Faith,  but  with  them  faith  was  an 
act  of  the  intellect  alone  :  "  fairness  in  listening  to 
evidence,  and  judging  according^,  without  being 
led  away  by  prejudices  and  inclinations."'!'  And 
thus  the  Broad-Churchman's  faith — or  rather  what 
he  called  his  faith — had  nothing  in  it  which  w^as 
opposed  to  his  natural  self-conceit  or  self-reliance. 
And  thus  it  became  a  matter  of  remark  that  so 
many  of  those  trained  at  Eugby  under  Dr.  Arnold 
and  those  who  thought  along  with  him,  were  re- 
markable for  self-assertion  and  contempt  of  others. 

The  tendency  to  make  the  intellect  into  an  idol 
showed  itself  pre-eminently  in  an  impatience  of  that 
•system  of  dogma  on  which  alone  true  Christian  faith 
can  be  built.  Hence  followed,  naturally,  a  dislike 
to  those  expressions  of  dogma  which  are  termed 
creeds  ;  and  more  especially  to  that  confession  of 
our  Christian  faith  which  is  commonly  called  the 
Creed  of  Saint  Athanasius  :  and  this,  not  only  for 
its  precise  expression  of  the  doctrine  of  the  ever- 
blessed  Trinity,  but  for  the  declarations  therein 
■contained  concerning  that  Catholic  Faith  whereof 
it  is  a  confession,  "  Wliich  Faith  except  every  one 
do  keej)  whole  and  undefiled,  without  doubt  he 
shall  perish  everlastingly."  Of  this  Creed  Dr. 
Arnold  wrote  :  "  I  do  not  believe  the  damnatory 

*  Eph.  iii.  20. 

t  EasTj  Lessons  on  Christian  Evidences.  1838,  pp.  22.  A  little 
while  before,  it  is  said,  "  When  they  [the  Sacred  Writers]  commend 
a  man's  faith,  it  is  because  he  listens  fairly  to  evidence,  and  judges 
according  to  the  reasons  laid  before  him."    lb.  p.  20. 


clauses  in  the  Atlianasian  Creed,  under  any  quali- 
fication given  to  them,  except  such  as  substitute 
for   them  propositions  of  a  wholly  different    cha- 
racter.    Those  clauses  proceed  on  a  false  notion, 
which  I  have  elsewhere  noticed,  that  the  import- 
ance of  all  opinions  touching  God's  nature  is  to 
be  measured  by  His  greatness  ;  and  that,  therefore, 
erroneous  notions  about  the  Trinity  are  worse  than 
erroneous  notions  about  Church  government,   or 
pious  frauds,  or  any  other  disputed  point  on  which 
there  is  a  right  and  a  wrong,  a  true  and  a  false,  and 
on  which  the  wrong  and  the  false  may  indeed  be 
highly  sinful ;  but  it  does  not  follow  that  they  must 
be."    It  will  be  observed,  by  the  way,  how  ignorant 
Dr.  Arnold  there  showed  himself  to  be  of  the  dif- 
ference between  opinions  and  faith.     Dr.  Temple 
also,  one   of  Dr.  Arnold's    successors    at   Eugby, 
wrote  thus  of  the  Catholic  symbols  : — "  We   can 
acknowledge  the  great  value  of  the  forms  in  which 
the  first  ages  of  the  Church  defined  the  truth,  and 
yet  refuse  to  be  bound  by  them."*     So  with  regard 
to  Christian  dosjma  in  its  details  :  the  members  of 
the  Broad-Church  party  professed  to  hold  "  the 
holy  Catholic  Church,"  but  made  out  that  society 
to  consist,  not  of  the  baptized,   organised  in  one 
body  through  the  indwelling  and  operation  of  the 
one  Holy  Spirit,  the  Spirit  of  Christ  the  Head,  but 
merely  what  we  commonly  term  civilised  society. 
And   of  course,  when  Broad-Churchmen  sought, 
under  the  guidance  of  the  late  Archdeacon  Hare, 
"  to  revive "  what  they  deemed   to   be   "  a   true 
ecclesiastical  government,   and   to   reanimate  the 

*  Essays  and  Beviews,  12th  edition,  p.  52. 


Church,"  the  means  by  which  they  sought  to 
compass  their  object  were  the  giving  back  those 
functions  to  her  members  which  are  now  (as  they 
said)  "  usurped  by  her  ministers."*  Thus  Dr. 
Arnold  would  have  had  captains  of  vessels  and 
commanding  officers  authorised  (by  Act  of  Parlia- 
ment, we  presume)  to  administer  what  he  called 
the  Communion. 

Wliat  theology  they  taught  was  hardly  anything 
save  natural  theology  and  philosophical  deductions 
from  it.  Generalities  about  the  universal  love  of 
God,  a  love  which  was  in  the  end  so  to  prevail 
that  there  would  be  no  endless  punishment  for 
any — a  love  which  would  in  the  end  so  swamp 
man's  free-will  that  all  men  would  at  last  be  saved 
and  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  in  spite  of 
themselves.  But  the  more  Broad-Churchmen  re- 
jected theological  dogma,  the  more  did  the  active 
ones  among  them  lay  themselves  out  for  work  of  a 
certain  character.  They  went  in  for  secular  in- 
struction, working-men's  evening  classes,  cricket- 
clubs,  athletic  sports,  and  such  like  things.  And, 
no  doubt,  in  these  ways  they  did  a  great  deal  of 
good  :  only  it  was  not  religion. 

That  there  had  been  Broad-Churchmen  in  the 
Anglican  Communion  ever  since  the  times  of  Arch- 
bishop Tillotson  and  Bishop  Burnet  may  very 
likely  be  true ;  though  the  party  can  hardly  be  said 
to  have  had  any  commencement  as  a  party  until 
the  times  of  Wliately,  Arnold,  Hare,  and  Thirlwall. 
Of  the  party  in  its  modern  form,  Dr.  Arnold  of 
Eugby  may  perhaps  be  deemed  to  have  been  the 

*  Conybeare's  Essays,  Ecclesiastical  and  Social,  p.  144. 


principal  leader.  Otliers,  however,  in  its  ranks 
soon  came  to  the  front  :  such  were  Maurice, 
Stanley,  and  Kingsley,  all  of  whom  held  important 
positions.  Such  also  were  the  contributors  to  a 
volume  entitled  Essays  and  Reviews,  of  which  more 
will  have  to  be  said  shortly.  Fredeeick  Denison 
Maurice  was  Professor  of  English  Literature  and 
also  of  Theology  in  King's  College,  London,  and 
also  Chaplain  of  Lincoln's  Lm.  He  was,  however, 
deprived  of  his  two  Professorships  by  the  Council 
of  the  College  in  1853,  on  account  of  his  teaching 
with  reference  to  future  punishment.  Arthur 
Penrhyn  Stanley,  the  biographer  of  Dr.  Arnold, 
was  Examining  Chaplain  to  Bishop  Tait  of  London, 
Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  in  the  University 
of  Oxford,  and  afterwards  Dean  of  Westminster, 
where  he  made  himself  notorious,  when  the  revision 
of  King  James's  Version  of  the  Bible  was  to  be 
commenced,  by  his  invitation  of  the  Unitarian  Mr. 
Vance  Smith,  along  with  the  other  members  of  the 
Eevising  Companies,  to  receive  the  Holy  Com- 
munion in  Henry  VH.'s  Chapel ;  and  at  a  later 
period,  by  inviting  persons  not  members  of  the 
Church  of  England  to  lecture  from  the  Abbey 
pulpit.  Charles  Kingsley,  after  having  got  some 
fame  as  a  novel  writer,  became  Professor  of 
Modern  History  in  the  University  of  Cambridge. 
These,  and  such  as  thought  with  them,  taught  and 
preached  and  wrote,  and  their  principles,  being 
agreeable  to  man's  natural  self-conceit,  spread 
rapidly  among  the  educated  classes. 

The  Broad-Church  movement  was  to  some  extent 
a  reaction  ;  a  reaction  from  the  dogmatism  of  the 


Tractarians,  a  reaction  from  the  unreality  of  Low- 
Churchmen.  It  was  also  a  reaction  from  all  which, 
whether  in  its  abuse  or  in  its  lawful  use,  tended  to 
confine  or  restrain  the  action  of  man's  intellect :  it 
was  a  protest  against  bigotry  and  narrow-minded- 
ness in  either  party.  Only,  unfortunately,  being 
an  intellectual  movement  and  not  a  religious  one, 
while  it  was  destructive  of  shams  in  religion,  it 
failed  to  construct  anything  specially  religious  in 
their  place.  Conybeare,  indeed,  did,  in  his  Essay 
on  Church  Parties,  describe  the  normal  Broad- 
Churchman  as  wishing  to  revive  "  daily  services, 
frequent  communions,  memorials  of  our  Christian 
calling  presented  to  our  notice  in  crosses  and 
wayside  oratories,  commemorations  to  holy  men  of 
all  times  and  countries."*  Only,  unfortunate^, 
Broad-Churchmen  do  not  seem  to  have  got  beyond 
the  wish.  We  should  like  to  know  what  Broad- 
Churchman  ever  erected  a  cross  or  wayside  chapel 
on  his  estate,  or  started  a  daily  service  or  a  weekly 
communion  in  his  church. 

And  what  sort  of  a  front  did  the  Low-Church 
party  present  to  the  new  school  of  opinion,  at  once 
so  popular  and  so  dangerous  ?  The  Eev.  T.  E. 
Birks  wrote  a  work,  entitled  The  Bible  and  Modern 
Thought,  in  which  he  sought  to  establish  the  super- 
natural character  of  inspiration,  prophecy,  miracles, 
the  historical  truth  of  various  parts  of  Scripture, 
and  the  substantial  agreement  of  Scripture  with  the 
conclusions  of  modern  science.  Although,  how- 
ever, one  Low-Churchman  after  another  mio-ht  lift 

*  Essays,  p,  143.  Conybeare  is  quoting  from  Dr.  Arnold's. 
Sermons,  Introduction,  p.  56. 


up  his  voice  against  Broad-Church  teaching,  yet  in 
the  main  the  Low-Church  party  was  well  content 
to  let  Broad-Churchmen  alone.  In  so  far  as 
Broad-Churchmen  opposed  Tractarianism,  Low- 
Churchmen  were  at  one  with  them;  in  so  far  as 
they  opposed  Low-Church  ways,  Low-Churchmen 
had  not,  for  the  most  part,  intellect  enough  to 
grapple  with  their  teaching.  In  their  reviews  of 
Broad-Church  works,  they  did  little  else  than  indi- 
cate various  points  in  which  Broad-Churchmen  had 
taken  the  liberty  to  differ  from  them. 

It  is  indeed  true  that  an  attack  upon  Broad- 
Church  teaching  (if  indeed  it  deserved  the  name  of 
an  attack)  was  made  in  1856,  in  the  person  of  the 
Eev.  Benjamin  Jowett,  Eegius  Professor  of  Greek 
in  the  University  of  Oxford,  but  the  result  was 
simply  ridiculous  and  nothing  more,  as  in  truth 
might  have  been  anticipated.  The  Eev.  Charles 
Portales  Golightly,  who  in  1859  was  Curate  of 
Marston,  near  Oxford,  joined  with  Dr.  Macbride, 
Principal  of  Magdalen  Hall  (both  of  these  being 
pronounced  Low-Churchmen),  in  re(|^uesting  the 
Yice-Chancellor  to  ascertain  from  Professor  Jowett 
whether  he  was  prepared  to  renew  his  subscription 
to  the  XXXIX  Articles,  and  to  the  three  articles  of 
the  XXXYIth  Canon.  This  was  because  the  Pro- 
fessor, in  his  work  on  St.  Paul's  Epistles  to  the  Thes- 
salonians,  Galatians,  and  Eomans,  had  made  certain 
statements  which  appeared  to  the  gentlemen  afore- 
said open  to  grave  exception.  One  of  these  state- 
ments was  that  "  not  the  sacrifice,  nor  the  satisfac- 
tion, nor  the  ransom,  but  the  greatest  moral  act 
ever  done  in  this  world — the  act,  too,  of  One  in  our 


likeness — is  the  assurance  to  us  that  God  in  Christ 
is  reconciled  to  the  world."  *  But  another  was  the 
simple  statement  of  fact,  that  the  expression  used 
in  the  Second  Article  of  Eeligion  was  not  that  used 
in  the  Epistles  of  the  New  Testament.  "  God," 
said  Professor  Jowett,  "  is  unchangeable :  it  is  we 
who  are  reconciled  to  Him,  not  He  to  us."  f  (It 
will,  of  course,  strike  the  reader  that  the  Professor 
himself  had  ignored  this  in  the  passage  quoted  just 
now.)  The  two  complainants,  in  bringing  up  this 
last  statement  by  the  Professor,  a  statement  of 
simple  and  undeniable  fact,  and  in  grounding 
thereon  in  effect  a  charge  of  heresy,  showed  how 
little  able  they  themselves  were  to  distinguish 
between  principles  and  persons,  and  how  satisfied 
they  would  be  with  crushing  the  individual  Pro- 
fessor Jowett  on  any  pretence  whatsoever.  For  if 
the  letter  of  this  Article  was  to  be  pressed,  no  one 
who  received  the  Scriptures  as  a  perfect  rule  of 
faith  would  be  able  to  accept  the  Article.  The  ex- 
pression in  the  Article  is,  "  Who  truly  suffered,  was 
crucified,  dead,  and  buried,  to  reconcile  His  Father 
to  us."  On  the  other  hand,  St.  Paul,  writing  to  the 
Corinthians,  does  not  say,  "  God  was  in  Christ  re- 
conciling Himself  unto  the  world,"  but  "  God  was 
in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  unto  Himself."  [[; 
And  similarly  to  the  Colossians,  not  "  having  made 
peace  through  the  blood  of  His  Cross,  by  Him  to 
reconcile  Himself  unto  all  things,"  but  "  by  Him 
to  reconcile  all  things  unto  Himself."  §    Now,  as  it 

*  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Thessalonians  dc,  vol.  ii.  p.  481. 
t  lb.  p.  152.  X  2  Corinthians,  v.  19. 

§  Colossians  i.  20. 


was  impossible  to  suppose  that  in  imposing  the 
second  Article  the  Church  meant  to  contradict,  and 
to  make  others  contradict,  the  clear  statements  of 
Scripture,  it  would  follow  of  necessity  that  the 
Church  meant  to  assert,  in  the  passage  in  question, 
no  more  than  that  a  reconciliation  between  God 
and  us  was  an  object  of  Christ's  Passion  and  Death  ; 
and  not  to  define  exactly  which  party  was  to  be  in 
any  sense  the  reconciled  one. 

Therefore  the  complainants  might  advantage- 
ously, we  think,  have  forborne  to  say  anything 
about  the  contrast  drawn  by  Professor  Jowett 
between  the  expression  found  in  the  Articles  and 
those  found  in  the  New  Testament.  The  other 
passage  which  they  cited  from  the  Professor's 
works  micrlit  have  been  deemed  to  furnish  sufficient 
ground  for  proceedings  in  an  ecclesiastical  court ; 
but  as  things  were,  all  that  was  done  was  to  request 
that  the  Professor  might  be  called  upon  to  renew 
his  subscription  to  the  XXXIX  Articles,  and  to  the 
three  Articles  specified  in  the  Canon  ;  as  if,  sup- 
posing him  to  be  already  holding  his  Professorship 
on  false  pretences,  he  would  have  refused  to  do 
such  a  trivial  act  as  writing  his  name  at  the  bottom 
of  a  paper.  The  Vice-Chancellor,  however,  con- 
curred with  the  two  Low- Church  complainants  in 
thinking  their  proposal  reasonable  ;  and  on  a  fit- 
ting public  occasion  he  called  upon  the  Professor 
to  renew  his  subscription  accordingly.  "  Give  me 
a  pen  !  "  said  the  Professor.  A  pen  was  handed  to 
him,  he  wrote  his  name  in  the  proper  place  for 
sio^natures,  and  Dr.  Macbride  and  the  Eev.  Charles 
Portales  Golightly  were  stultified. 


In  1860  the  Eev.  Frederick  Deiiison  Maurice, 
Chaplain  of  Lincohi's  Inn,  was  appointed  by  the 
Crown,  Lord  Pahnerston  being  then  Premier,  to 
the  incumbency  of  St.  Peter's,  Vere  Street,  in  the 
parish  of  St.  Marylebone.  Mr.  Maurice  had 
already  been  ejected  from  the  professorship  of 
Divinity  at  King's  College,  London,  on  the  grounds 
of  a  disbelief  of  the  endlessness  of  future  punish- 
ment. At  this  new  appointment  the  zeal  of  the 
Record  was  stirred,  and  the  Editor  called  upon 
everybody  to  bear  a  hand  in  preventing  the  im- 
pending mischief.  A  memorial  was  in  consequence 
got  up  calling  upon  the  Bishop  of  London  (Dr. 
Tait)  to  refuse  institution.  It  was,  however,  signed 
by  no  more  than  twenty  Low-Church  clergymen, 
not  one  of  whom  had  any  eminence  in  the  Low- 
Church  party ;  and  after  the  appointment  was 
definitely  settled,  an  address  congratulating  Mr. 
Maurice  thereupon  received  among  other  signa- 
tures that  of  the  Eev.  John  James  Stewart  Perowne, 
Examining  Chaplain  to  the  Low-Church  Bishop  of 
Norwich  (Dr.  Pelliam). 

II.  10 

130  "essays  and  reviews.' 


Polemical  Period,  continued.  Publication  of  Essays  and  Bevietvs. 
Tendency  of  that  Work.  Proceedings  against  Dr.  Williams  and 
Mr.  Wilson. 

"  Lo,  they  have  rejected  the  word  of  the  Lord  ;  and  what 
wisdom  is  in  them  ?  " — Jeremiah,  viii.  9. 

"  Facilius  malum,  cui  rationis  aliquid  affuerit,  pro  bono  habebitur, 
quam  ut  bonum  ratione  desertum  non  pro  malo  judicetur." — 
Tertullian,  Adv.  Marc.  i.  22. 

A  GEEATER  outburst,  liowever,  of  Broad-Cliurcli 
opinions  than  had  yet  taken  place  was  the  pubh- 
cation  in  1860  of  a  volume  entitled  Essays  and 
Revieics.  This  work  consisted  of  seven  articles, 
written,  the  public  was  told,  in  entire  independence 
of  one  another  ;  and  it  professed  to  be  an  attempt 
at  illustrating  the  advantage  derivable  to  the  cause 
of  religious  and  moral  truth  from  a  free  handling, 
in  what  the  publishers  called  a  becoming  spirit,  of 
the  several  subjects. 

The  first  article  was  an  essay  by  Frederick  Temple, 
D.D.,  Chaplain  in  Ordinary  to  the  Queen,  Head 
Master  of  Eugby  School,  and  Chaplain  to  the  Earl 
of  Denbigh.  The  subject  was  the  Education  of  the 
World.  In  it  the  education  of  the  Hebrew  nation 
was  divided  into  three  periods — that  of  Eules,  last- 
ing till  the  time  of  Christ ;  that  of  Example,  lasting 
during  the  short  period  of  the  Lord's  mortal  life  ; 
and  that  of  Principles,  in  which  the  human  race  is 
(said  the  writer)  "left  to  itself,  to  be  guided  by 
the  teaching  of  the  Spirit  within."  *     While,  liow- 

*  Essays  and  Bevietvs,  12th  edition,  p.  G 

ESSAYS   BY    DRS.    TEMPLE    AND    R.    WILLIAMS.  131 

ever,  tlie  Hebrew  nation  was  in  its  turn  educating 
the  world  in  monotheism  and  moral  purity,  Eome, 
Greece,  and  Asia  were  being  educated  each  in  its 
own  line.  Eome  was  learning  the  art  of  govern- 
ment, the  virtue  of  patriotism,  and  the  fulfilment 
of  political  duties  in  general.  Greece  was  learninc^ 
the  cultivation  of  the  reason  and  taste.  Asia  was 
learning  the  immortality  of  the  soul  and  other 
mysteries.  And  from  these  four  courses  of  educa- 
tion mankind  was  learning  the  discipline  of  the 
conscience,  of  the  will,  of  the  reason  and  taste,  and 
of  the  imagination.  There  might  well  be  some 
truth  in  these  theories ;  unfortunately,  however. 
Dr.  Temple  showed  how  little  he  knew  of  the 
supernatural  as  applied  to  the  Christian  life,  when 
he  spoke  of  the  Church  as  left  to  work  out  hy  lier 
natural  faculties  the  principles  of  her  own  action.* 
The  second  article  was  a  review  by  Eowland 
Williams,  D.D.,  Vicar  of  Broad  Chalke,  Wiltshire, 
and  late  Vice-Principal  and  Professor  of  Hebrew  in 
St.  David's  College,  Lampeter.  This  was  the  same 
Dr.  Williams  who  had  preached  such  questionable 
doctrine  before  the  University  of  Cambridge,  that 
before  his  course  of  sermons  was  over  he  received 
a  private  hint  that  he  had  better  not  finish  it ;  f 
who,  however,  when  appointed  to  preach  on  a 
subsequent  Founder's  day,  at  King's  College,  that 
sermon  which,  according  to  custom,  the  Uni- 
versity are  invited  to  hear,  took  for  his  text  the 
words  of  St.  Paul  to  Felix,  "  This  I  confess  unto 

*  Essays  and  Revieivs,  12th  edition,  p.  48. 
t  Dr.  Williams  preached  at  St.  Mary's,  Cambridge,  on  the  first 
and  second  Sundays  of  Advent,  1854. 


132  ESSAY    BY    DR.    R.    WILLIAMS. 

thee,  that  after  the  way  which  they  call  heresy,, 
so  worship  I  the  God  of  my  fathers ; "  *  and 
proceeded  thereupon  to  set  forth  his  own  theo- 
logical views.  On  his  mentioning  this  afterwards 
in  conversation  with  a  friend,  his  friend,  an  ortho- 
dox Christian,  was  said  to  have  replied,  "But  I 
say,  Williams,  why  didn't  jon  finish  the  verse  ?  "  Tra- 
dition does  not  state  what  reason  Dr.  Williams 
alleged  in  answer ;  it  may,  however,  be  well  sur- 
mised to  have  been  that  Dr.  Williams  did  not 
altogether  agree  with  St.  Paul  in  "  believing  all 
things  that  are  written  in  the  law  and  the  prophets." 
Dr.  Williams's  contribution  to  Essays  and  Re- 
vietvs  consisted  in  a  review  of  certain  works  written 
by  the  Chevalier  Bunsen,  and  presenting  the  reader 
with  certain  conclusions  of  German  criticism  touch- 
ing Canonical  Scripture.  Professing  himself  an 
ardent  admirer  of  Bunsen,  Dr.  Williams  proceeded 
to  state  these  conclusions  as  triumphantly  proved, 
and  to  enlarge  upon  them  accordingly  for  the  en- 
lightenment of  those  unfortunate  English  people 
who,  not  being  students  of  German  writings,  were 
still  in  the  dim  twilight  of  orthodox  Christianity. 
Thus,  in  discussing  Egyptian  history,  he  suggested,, 
after  Bunsen,  that  the  angel  which  destroyed  the 
Egyptian  first-born  may  have  been  the  Bedouin 
host.f  The  Pentateuch  was,  indeed,  Mosaic  in  the 
sense  of  embodying  Moses'  system,  but  was  com- 
piled out  of  earlier  fragments  at  a  time  subsequent 

*  Acts  xxiv.  14.  The  sermon  was  preached  March  25,  1855 ; 
and  was  entitled  The  Truth  and  the  BooTc ;  or,  the  Spirit  mid  the 
Letter,  and  published  in  a  volume  of  sermons  entitled  Bational 
Godliness,  Cambridge  and  London,  1855. 

t  Essays  aiid  Bevieivs,  12th  edition,  p.  70. 


ESSAY    BY    DR.    R.    WILLIAMS.  133 

to  the  establishment  of  the  IsraeUtish  monarchy.* 
The  Bible  generally  was  an  expression  of  devout 
reason. f  The  Book  of  Jonah  contained  a  late 
legend,  founded  on  a  misconception. J  Those  por- 
tions of  Daniel  which  were  supposed  to  be  specially 
predictive  were  a  history  of  past  occurrences  up  to 
the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,^  and  while  some 
passages  of  alleged  prophecy  might  "  be  doubtful, 
one  perhaps  in  Zechariah,  and  one  in  Isaiah,  capable 
of  being  made  directly  Messianic,  and  a  chapter 
possibly  in  Deuteronomy  foreshadowing  the  final 
fall  of  Jerusalem,"  "  even  these  few  cases  "... 
tended  to  melt,  if  they  "  were  not  already  melted, 
in  the  crucible  of  searching  inquiry."  ||  Psalm  xxii. 
referred  to  Israel ;  the  Hebrew  word  rendered  in 
King  James's  version  "  they  pierced  "  was  rendered 
"  like  a  lion."  ^  Isaiah  liii.  referred  to  Jeremiah 
rather  than  to  any  other  single  person.**  What 
figures  in  Canonical  Scripture  as  the  Second  Epistle 
of  St.  Peter  was  dismissed  as  unquestionably  spu- 
rious, f f  In  all  this  Dr.  Williams  followed  Bunsen 
with  an  air  of  the  most  triumphant  dogmatism  ; 
and  it  was  intimated  in  some  metrical  lines  at  the 
close  of  the  essay  that  those  who  taught  according 
to  the  old-fashioned  views,  rather  than  according 
to  the  new  learning  of  Chevalier  Bunsen  and  Dr. 
Williams,  were  but  "  hirelings." 

As  Dr.  Eowland  Williams  had  shown  from 
Baron  Bunsen  how  to  get  rid  of  Scripture  pre- 
dictions, so  the  Eev.   Baden  Powell,  M.A.,  F.E.S., 

*  Essays  and  Bevieius,  12th  edition,  p.  71.  t  H- 

X  Ih.  p.  91.  §  See  ib.  p.  90.  ||  lb.  p.  82. 

H  Ih.  p.  81.  **  Ib.  p.  87.  tt  li-  p.  100. 

134  ESSAY    BY    MR.    BADEN   POWELL. 

late  Savilian  Professor  of  Geometry  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Oxford,  showed,  in  an  essay  on  the  Study 
of  the  Evidences  of  Christianity,  how  to  get  rid  of 
Scripture  miracles,  which   he    seems    to  have  re- 
garded   as    the   main   difficulties    and   hindrances 
to  the   acceptance  of  Christianity.     Proposing    to 
survey  in  a  calm  and   unprejudiced  manner    the 
various  opinions  and   arguments  adduced  in  de- 
fending Christianity,  and  starting  from  the  premiss 
"  that  from   the   nature    of  our   antecedent  con- 
victions" with  reference  to  any  peculiarly  mar- 
vellous  event    "  the  probability   of  some  kind  of 
mistake  or  deception  somewhere,  though  we  know 
not  where,  is  greater  than  the  probability  of  the 
event  really  happening  in  the  way   and  from  the 
causes  assigned,"  *  he  maintained  that  there  was 
an   undue  confusion  between    the    force    of  testi- 
mony in  regard    to  human  affairs   and  events  in 
history,  on  the  one  hand,  and  in  regard  to  physical 
facts,  on   the   other.     "The   most  seemingly  im- 
probable events  in  human  history  may  be  perfectly 
credible,  on  sufficient  testimony,  however  contra- 
dicting   ordinary    experience    of  human   motives 
and   conduct — simply  because    we    cannot   assign 
any  limits  to  the  varieties   of  human  dispositions, 
passions,  or   tendencies,    or  the  extent  to  which 
they  may  ])e  influenced  by  circumstances  of  which, 
perhaps,  we  have  little  or  no  knowledge  to  guide 
us.     But  no  such  cases  would  have  the  remotest 
applicability  to  alleged  violations   of  the  laws  of 
matter,  or  interruptions  of  the   course  of  physical 
causes."  f 

*  Essays  and  Reviews,  12th  edition,  p.  127.         t  Ih-  pp-  158-9. 

ESSAY    BY    MR.    BADEN    POWELL.  135 

"  What  is  the  real  conclusion  "  [he  asked]  "  from 
the  far-famed  Historic  Doubts  and  the  Chrojiicles  of 
Ecnarf?  But  simply  this — there  is  a  rational  so- 
lution, a  real  conformity  to  analogy  and  experience, 
to  whatever  extent  a  partially  informed  inquirer 
might  be  led  to  reject  the  recounted  apparent 
wonders  on  imperfect  knowledge,  and  from  too 
hasty  inference ;  these  delightful  parodies  on 
Scripture  (if  they  prove  anything)  would  simply 
prove  that  the  Bible  narrative  is  no  more  pro- 
perly miraculous  than  the  marvellous  exploits  of 
Napoleon  I.,  or  the  paradoxical  events  of  recent 
history."  *  Looking  upon  an  alleged  miracle 
abstractedly  as  a  physical  event  and  therefore 
to  be  referred  to  physical  causes,  he  concluded 
that  it  then  ceases  to  be  supernatural:  thus 
begging  the  whole  question.  The  destructive 
character  of  these  statements  was  ill-concealed 
by  the  admission  that  an  alleged  miracle  might  be 
viewed  as  connected  with  religious  doctrine,  and 
regarded  in  a  sacred  light,  and  which  would  thus 
cease  to  be  capable  of  investigation  by  reason, 
but  be  accepted  on  religious  grounds ;  f  thouo-h 
what  Mr.  Powell  meant  to  be  understood  hereby 
he  did  not  explain.  "  In  nature  and  from  na- 
ture "  [said  he],  "  by  science  and  by  reason,  we 
neither  have  nor  can  possibly  have  any  evidence 
of  a  Deity  working  miracles :  for  that  we  must  go 
out  of  nature  and  beyond  science.  If  we  could 
have  any  such  evidence  from  nature,  it  could 
only  prove    extraordinary   natural   effects,   which 

*  Essays  and  Beviews,  12th  edition,  pp.  165-6. 
t  16.  p.  170. 

136  ESSAY    BY    MR.    H.    B.    WILSON. 

would  not  be  miracles  in  the  old  theological 
sense."  *  The  idea  even  of  creation  he  was  glad 
to  reject,f  in  favour  of  "  the  universal  self-sus- 
taining and  self-evolving  powers  which  pervade 
all  nature."! 

The  author  of  the  fourth  paper  was  the  Eev. 
Henry  Bristow  Wilson,  B.D.,  Vicar  of  Great 
Stoughton,  Huntingdonshire,  and  formerly  Bamp- 
ton  Lecturer.  This  was  the  same  Mr.  Wilson 
who,  when  Fellow  and  Senior  Tutor  of  St.  John's 
College,  Oxford,  had  joined  three  other  tutors — 
Messrs.  Churton,  Griffiths,  and  Tait — in  requesting 
the  anonymous  author  of  Iract  XC.  to  publish 
his  name,  on  account  of  what  they  deemed  the 
dangerous  tendency  of  the  said  Tract ;  and  thus, 
indirectly,  in  hounding  its  author  (Mr.  Newman) 
out  of  the  Church  of  England.  Mr.  Wilson's 
paper  was  on  the  National  Church.  It  commenced 
with  noticing  certain  addresses  delivered  at  Geneva 
"by  distinguished  persons  holding  evangelical 
sentiments,"  and  entitled  Seances  Historiques  de 
Geneve.,  in  two  of  which  the  speakers  had  ex- 
pressed diverse  views  as  to  the  true  basis  of  the 
Church :  one  asserting  the  "  individualist "  prin- 
ciple as  such  basis,  and  the  other  the  "  multi- 
tudinist"  principle.  Mr.  Wilson  then  proceeded 
to  speak  of  the  Church  of  England,  by  which 
he  appears  to  have  meant  the  aggregate  of  Chris- 
tian relisionists  whose  alles^iance  was  due  to  the 
British  Sovereign ;  ignoring  the  nature  of  Baptism 
as  the  sole    door  of  admission   into  the   Church 

*  Essays  and  Bevictvs,  12th  edition,  p.  170. 
t  lb.  p.  154.  X  li-  P-  161. 

ESSAY    BY    MR.    H.    B.    WILSON.  137 

Catholic  or  any  of  its  branches.  "  Each  one  born 
into  the  nation  is,  together  with  his  civil  rights, 
born  into  a  membership  or  privilege,  as  belonging 
to  a  spiritual  society."  *  He  spoke  of  large  num- 
bers of  the  more  acute  of  our  population  as  re- 
coiling from  certain  doctrines  preached  at  church 
and  chapel,  as  distrusting  the  old  arguments  for, 
or  proofs  of,  a  miraculous  revelation,  and  as 
having  misgivings  as  to  the  authority,  or  the 
-extent  of  the  authority,  of  the  Scriptures,  f  He 
spoke  of  grave  doubts  as  arising  "  in  the  minds  of 
really  well-meaning  persons,  w^iether  the  secular 
future  of  humanity  is  necessarily  bound  up  w^ith 
the  diffusion  of  Christianity — whether  the  Church 
is  to  be  hereafter  the  life-ojiver  to  human  so- 
ciety."J  And  by  failing  even  to  hint  at  any 
solution  of  such  doubts  he  implied  that  he  shared 
in  the  doubts  himself.  Asserting  "  a  very  wide- 
spread alienation,  both  of  educated  and  uneducated 
persons,  from  the  Christianity  which  is  ordinarily 
presented  in  our  churches  and  chapels,"  he  in- 
sinuated that  it  might  be  either  their  reason  or 
their  moral  sense  which  was  shocked  by  what  they 
lieard  there ;  that  is,  we  suppose,  by  what  they 
would  have  heard  had  they  gone  thither.  §  And 
he  made  capital  of  the  existence  of  various  asso- 
ciations to  procure  the  revision  of  the  Anglican 
formularies,  especially  in  "  omitting  one  unhappy 
creed."  |1  By  way  of  indicating  what  sort  of 
teaching  ought  to  be  given,  and  from  which  people 

*  Essays  and  Bevieivs,  12th  edition,  p.  233. 
t  lb.  pp.  180-1.  t  n.  p.  178. 

§   lb.  pp.  179.  !l  lb.  p.  180. 

138  ESSAYS    BY    MR.    H.    B.    WILSON 

would   not  have  reason  for   recoiling,   lie  hinted 
that  there  were  "  traits  in  the  Scriptural  person  of 
Jesus  "  which  were  "  better  explained  by  referring 
them  to  an  ideal  than  an  historical  origin :  "  and 
that    there  were    "  parts    of  Scripture   more  use- 
fully applied  ideologically  than  in  any  other  man- 
ner— as,  for  instance,  the  history  of  the  tempta- 
tion of  Jesus  by  Satan,  and  accounts  of  demoniacal 
possession.'  *      The    references,    too,   in  the   New 
Testament  to  Old  Testament  narratives  of  marvels 
and  catastrophes  were  said  to  be  made  "  without 
either  denying  or  asserting  their   literal  truth — 
such  as  the  destruction  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah 
by  fire  from  heaven,   and  the  Noachian  Deluge. f^ 
Jesus  Christ  had  "  not  revealed  His  religion  as  a 
theology    of  the    intellect,    nor   as    an   historical 
faith."  J      "  Doctrinal    limitations    in   the   multi- 
tudinist  form  of  Church  "  were  not  essential  to  the 
Church's    existence :    in   other   words,   you  could 
have  a  Church  without  a  creed.     Doctrinal  limita- 
tions rather  presented  obstacles   to  a  true  Catho- 
licity. §     "  The  Gospel  was  to  have  sway  in  doing 
more  perfectly  that  which  heathen  religions  were 
doing   imperfectly."      What  that  was  the  reader 
was  not  informed  precisely ;  but,  from  the  close  of 
the  same  sentence  from  which  we  are  quoting,  it 
would  seem  that  it  was,  in  Mr.  Wilson's  opinion, 
"  to   sanctify    all   social  relations   and  civil  insti- 
tutions,   and    to    enter    into    the    marrow    of   the 
national  life.||     And  thus  the  Church  of  England 

*  Essays  and  Reviews,  12th  edition,  p.  241. 
t  16.  p.  242.  X  lb.  p.  246. 

§  lb.  200.  !1  lb.  p.  202. 

AND    MR.    GOODWIN.  13& 

was  declared  to  be  "  as  properly  an  organ  of 
the  national  life  as  a  magistracy  or  a  legislative 
estate  :  "  a  statement  which  would  have  had  truth 
while  the  Church  and  the  nation  were  different 
names  for  the  same  set  of  individuals,  viewed  in 
one  or  the  other  of  two  different  aspects  ;  but  was, 
when  penned,  an  utter  falsity :  as  was  also  the 
implication  that  the  endowments  of  the  Church 
were  "  the  real  property  of  the  country,"  and 
that  they  had  properly  been  termed  "  the  nation- 
alty !  "  *  It  was  at  the  same  time  laid  down 
that  "  our  own  Churchmen  "  should  "  endeavour 
to  supply  to  the  negative  theologian  some  positive 
elements  in  Christianity,  on  grounds  more  sure  to 
him  than  the  assumption  of  an  objective  faith  once 
delivered  to  the  saints."  f 

C.  W.  Goodwin,  M.A.,  followed  with  an  attack 
on  the  Mosaic  Cosmogony.  After  a  brief  sketch  of 
some  of  the  principal  conclusions  at  which  geo- 
logists have  arrived  with  respect  to  the  several 
stages  through  which  the  earth's  crust  has  passed, 
and  the  animal  and  vegetable  organisms  which 
have  had  their  being  upon  it  in  successive  ages,  he 
proceeded  to  inquire  whether  those  two  accounts 
of  creation  which  we  have  in  the  early  chapters  of 
Genesis  could  be  shown  to  be  in  accordance  with 
our  astronomical  and  geological  knowledge.  In 
conducting  this  inquiry,  he  noticed  the  following 
points  in  the  Mosaic  narrative  : — That  light  and 
the  measurement  of  time  are  represented  as  exist- 
ing before  the  manifestation  of  the  sun  :  that  the 
firmament  (by  which  term  the  Hebrews  understood 

t  Essays  and  Beviews,  12th  edition,  p.  231.  ^  lb.  209. 

140  ESSA-yS    BY    MR.    GOODWIN 

a   solid   vault)  was  spoken  of  as    supporting  an 
ocean   of  water  above  it :  that  the    earth   is    de- 
scribed as  bringing  forth  trees  and  plants  destined 
for  food,  nothing  being  said  of  any  others :  that 
on  the  fourth  day  the  sun  and  moon  are  said  to 
have  been  made,  and  set  in  the  firmament,  to  give 
light,  and  to  serve  for  the  measurement  of  time : 
that    the  waters  are   said  to  have  brought  forth 
fishes,  other  marine  animals,  and  birds  ;  while  cattle, 
reptiles,  and  wild  beasts  are  said  to   have   been 
created  out  of  the  earth  :  and  that,  last  of  all,  man 
was  created  "  in  God's  image  and  after  God's  like- 
ness."    The  Hebrews,  Mr.  Goodwin  said,  contem- 
plated the  Divine  Being  in  the  visible  form  of  a 
man:  and  to   interpret  the  words  "God's  image, 
God's  likeness  "  as  implying  perfection  or  sinless- 
ness  was  explaining  them  away.     He  noted,  more- 
over, that  in  the  Mosaic  narrative  all  animals  were 
spoken   of    as   herbivorous.      And   having   made 
these  remarks,  he  further  observed  i\\^i,  prima  facie, 
the  Mosaic  account  was  at  variance  with  modern 
science.       Various    explanations    of  it   had    been 
adopted.     Dr.  Buckland  put  forth  one.  Archdeacon 
Pratt  another,  and  Hugh  Miller  a  third  ;  but  all 
failed  in  some  points.     It  did  not  occur  to  Mr. 
Goodwin  that  possibly  another  explanation  might 
be  given  which  would  not  fail — an  explanation  on 
the  view  that  all  after  verse  2,  and  possibly  all 
after  verse  1,  might  refer  to  a  merely  local  crea- 
tion, seen  in  vision,  and  so  described.     He  was,  in 
short,  content  to  regard  the  narrative  in  Genesis 
as  having   "  misled    the    world   for    centuries  :  "  * 

*  Essays  and  Reviews,  12th  edition,  p.  297. 

AND    MR.    PATTISON.  141 

being,  in  fact,  merely  "  a  human  utterance,"  * 
"  the  speculation  of  some  Hebrew  Descartes  or 
JSTewton,  promulgated  in  all  good  faith  as  the  best 
and  most  probable  account  that  could  be  then 
given  of  God's  universe,"  f  but  in  which  "  the 
early  speculator  .  .  .  asserted  as  facts  what  he 
knew  in  reality  only  as  probabilities."  J 

The  sixth  paper  was  an  essay  on  the  Tendencies 
of  Religious  Thought  in  England,  1688-1750.  It 
was  b}'-  Mark  Pattison,  B.D.,  Eector  of  Lincoln 
College,  Oxford.  The  object  was  to  show  what 
progress  was  being  made  by  thoughtful  people  in 
throwing  Divine  Eevelation  overboard  altogether. 
We  have  seen  how  Dr.  Temple  claimed  for  himself 
and  his  readers  the  liberty  of  not  being  bound  by 
the  Creeds. §  Mr.  Pattison,  however,  went  further, 
and  spoke  of  "  the  formulae  of  past  thinkings  in  the 
Church  of  England  "  as  having  "  long  lost  all  sense 
of  any  kind."  ||  Human  reason  was  the  ultimate 
referee  in  all  matters  whatsoever ;  nothing  beyond 
the  jurisdiction  of  reason  could  be  maintained. 
"  The  rational  defender  of  the  faith  .  .  .  pro- 
ceeds "  [said  he]  "  on  the  supposition  that  the 
whole  system  of  the  Church  is  the  one  and  exclu- 
sively true  expression  of  reason  upon  the  subject 
on  which  it  legislates.  He  claims  for  the  whole  of 
received  knowledge  what  the  jurist  claims  for 
international  law,  to  be  a  universal  science.  He 
lays  before  us,  on  the  one  hand,  the  traditional 
canon  or  symbol  of  doctrine.  On  the  other  hand, 
he  teaches  that  the  free  use  of  reason  upon  the 

*  Essays  and  Eeviews,  12th  edition,  p.  305.        f  lb.  pp.  303-4. 
X  lb.  p.  304.     §  See  above,  p.  122.     II  Essays  and  Bevieivs,  p.  359. 

142  ESSAYS    BY    MR.    PATTISON 

facts  of  Nature  and  Scripture  is  the  real  mode  by 
whicli  this  traditional  symbol  is  arrived  at."  *  Mr. 
Pattison  did  not  see  that  the  grounds  on  whicli  the 
rational  defender  of  the  faith  is  thus  described  as 
proceeding  are  unsound.  It  is  untrue,  in  point  of 
fact,  that  the  Creed  was  formed  through  the  free 
use  of  reason  upon  the  facts  of  Nature  or  Scripture. 
It  was,  in  the  mouths  of  those  who  first  uttered  it, 
the  expression  of  what  they  and  their  Churches 
had  received  by  tradition  from  the  first  Christian 
teachers.  Ignorant,  however,  of  this,  Mr.  Pattison 
proceeded  to  say  that  the  reason  whereof  he  spoke 
was  the  reason  of  the  majority  of  thinking  people  : 
"  It  is  not  the  speculative  reason  of  the  few,  but 
the  natural  conscience  of  the  many,  that  ques- 
tions the  extirpation  of  the  Canaanites,  or  the 
eternity  of  hell-torments."  f  Finally,  after  the 
following  piece  of  nonsense  had  been  duly  com- 
mended to  the  reason  of  Mr.  Pattison's  readers — 
"  Eationalism  itself,  in  order  to  make  the  proof  of 
revelation  universal,  is  obliged  to  resolve  religion 
into  the  moral  government  of  God  l^y  rewards 
and  punishments,  and  especially  the  latter  J  " — the 
f»-eneral  untenableness  of  the  idea  of  a  Divine 
revelation  coming  to  men  from  without  was  not 
obscurely  hinted  in  the  concluding  passage  :  "  Who- 
ever would  take  the  religious  literature  of  the 
present  day  as  a  whole,  and  endeavour  to  make 
out  clearly  on  what  basis  Eevelation  is  supposed 
by  it  to  rest,  whether  on  Authority,  on  the  Inward 
Light,  on  Eeason,  on  self-evidencing  Scripture,  or 

*  Essays  and  Bevieivs,  12th  edition,  p.  365. 
t  lb-  P-  344.  X  lb.  p.  353. 


on  the  combination  of  the  four,  or  some  of  them, 
and  in  what  proportions,  would  probably  find  that 
he  had  undertaken  a  perplexing,  but  not  altogether 
profitless,  inquiry." 

Professor  Jowett,  to  whom  we  have  already 
referred,  finished  the  series  with  an  essay  on  the 
Interpretation  of  Scripture.  In  this  he  hinted  at 
*'  a  difference  of  opinion  respecting  Eevelation 
itself — whether  given  beside  the  human  faculties 
or  through  them,  whether  an  interpretation  of  the 
laws  of  nature,  or  their  perfection  and  fulfil- 
ment ;  "  *  as  if  Eevelation  was  either  of  these  last. 
He  assumed  the  failure  of  prophecy  in  three  in- 
stances (Jer.  xxxvi.  30  ;  Isa  xxiii ;  Amos  vii.  10- 
17),f  but  without  specifying  any  proof.  He  spoke 
of  the  Sacred  Writers  as  attributing  to  the  Divine 
Being  "  actions  at  variance  with  that  higher  reve- 
lation which  He  has  given  of  Himself  in  the  Gos- 
pel." X  He  spoke  of  "  the  natural  meaning  of  the 
words  '  This  generation  shall  not  pass  till  all  these 
things  be  fulfilled  '  "  (Matt.  xxiv.  34)  as  "  set  aside  in 
favour  of  others  which,  however  improbable,"  were 
"  more  in  accordance  with  preconceived  opinions," 
or  seemed  "  worthy  of  the  Sacred  Writers."  §  He 
spoke  of  "  the  attempt  to  adapt  the  truths  of  Scrip- 
ture to  the  doctrines  of  the  Creeds  ;  "  ||  as  if  there 
had  been  any  inconsistency  between  the  two.  "  The 
Mcene  or  Athanasian  Creed  "  was  "  unfitted  to  be 
the  medium  by  the  help  of  which  Scripture  "  was 
"  to  be  explained."  ^     Indeed,  it  was  impHed  that 

*  Essays  and  Bevietvs,  12th  edition,  p.  400. 

t  lb.  p.  414.  t  lb.  p.  420.  §  lb.  p.  426. 

II  Ih.  427.  II  lb.  p.  428. 


"  the  Athanasian  doctrine  of  the  Trinity "  was 
contradicted  by  the  assertion  of  the  Lord  that 
He  did  not  know  the  day  or  hour  of  His  Second 

It  was  further  imphed  that  to  interpret  John  iii. 
5  in  reference  to  Baptism,  and  John  vi.  56  in  refer- 
ence to  the  Holy  Connnunion,  might  possibly  be 
erroneous :  f  for  it  was  laid  down  that  the  use  of 
Scriptural  language  respecting  the  Sacraments  had 
had  a  reflex  influence  on  the  interpretation  of  those 
same  passages.  (Laid  down,  we  say :  there  was 
no  allegation  of  any  proof.)  And  the  orthodox 
interpretation  of  such  passages  as  speak  of  our 
Lord's  being  tempted,  of  His  prayers  to  His  Father, 
of  His  not  knowing  the  hour  of  His  Second  Advent, 
w^ere  spoken  of  as  our  "  perversions  of  the  meanings 
of  words."  J 

Speaking  of  the  maxims  given  in  Scripture  for 
the  regulation  and  guidance  of  practice,  the  Pro- 
fessor asked  again  whether  such  maxims  were  "  to 
be  modified  by  experience,  or  acted  upon  in  de- 
fiance of  experience  ;  "  §  as  if  there  were  no  other 

The  declaration  of  St.  Paul,  "  As  in  Adam  all  die, 
even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive,"  "  and 
the  corresponding  passage  in  Eomans  v.  12,"  were 
declared  to  be  figurative.  ||  And  as  to  the  declara- 
tion, "  We  which  are  alive  and  remain  shall  be 
cauo-lit  up  together  with  them  in  the  clouds,  to 
meet  the  Lord  in  the  air,"  the  Professor  implied 

*  Essays  and  Eeviews,  12th  edition,  p.  443.  f  lb.  p.  446. 

X  lb.  pp.  429-431.  §  lb.  p.  432.  ||  lb.  p.  437 

ESSAY    BY    PliOFESSOR    JOWETT.  145 

that  it  need  not  be  so  understood  as  to  be  verified 
literally.*  Where  the  Lord  speaks  of  the  blessed- 
ness of  poverty,  and  the  hardness  which  they  that 
have  riches  will  experience  in  attaining  eternal  life 
— to  take  such  sayings  literally  would  be  injurious 
to  ourselves  and  society.f  The  precepts  about 
divorce  were  declared  to  be  practically  impossible 
of  fulfilment.  J 

By  little  and  little  the  Professor  passed  into 
libelling  Christian  teachers  in  general ;  for  inter- 
preting sudden  calamities  in  a  different  way  from 
that  inculcated  by  the  Lord  when  alluding  to  the 
fall  of  the  tower  in  Siloam ;  for  neglecting  to 
observe  that  the  good  Samaritan  in  the  parable 
was  of  a  different  religion  from  that  professed  by 
the  man  whom  he  succoured  ;  and  for  maintainincf 
that  the  precept  not  to  forbid  the  man  to  cast  out 
demons,  while  he  failed  to  follow  with  the  Apostles, 
had  no  application  for  the  present  time.§  And  it 
was  further  implied  that  Christian  teachers  forbade 
their  hearers  to  learn  about  the  Bible  all  which 
was  to  be  learnt.  And  Christian  ministers  were 
told  that  they  could  give  no  true  answer  to  the 
mechanic  or  artisan  who  might  urge  "the  objec- 
tions of  critics,"  for  that  they  themselves  were 
unable  to  look  at  things  as  they  truly  were  !  || 

Having  unsettled  the  faith  of  his  readers,  the 
Professor  proceeded  to  lay  down,  on  his  own 
authority,  that  Scripture  was  to  be  interpreted  like 
any  other  book  ;  and  by  way  of  explaining  what 

*  Essays  and  Reviews,  near  the  end  of  §  4. 
t  n.  p.  438.  X  I^-  P-  441.  §  lb.  p.  442. 

II  Ih.  p.  453. 

n.  11 


he  meant,  he  laid  down  "  that  Scripture  has  but 
one  meaning — the  meaning  which  it  had  to  the  mind 
of  the  prophet  or  evangehst  who  first  uttered  or 
wrote,  to  the  hearers  or  readers  who  received  it."  * 
And  this  one  meaning  was  to  be  gathered  from  itself 
not  only  "  without  reference  to  the  adaptations  of 
Fathers  or  divines,"  but  also  "  without  regard  to 
a  priori  notions  about  its  nature  and  origin."  f 
The  mystical  methods  of  applying  Scripture  were 
dismissed  as  unworthy  of  educated  people  ;  and  this 
contempt  was  shown  not  only  for  Scripture  language 
but  for  Scripture  type,  including  the  details  of  the 
Mosaic  ritual,  although  those  details  are  described 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as  being  a  shadow 
of  good  things  to  come.  Neither  was  there  any 
ground  for  assuming  design  of  any  kind  in  Scrip- 
ture any  more  than  in  Plato  or  Homer,  save  where 
the  meaning  of  prophetic  symbols  was  derived 
from  some  natural  association,  or  borrowed  in 
a  later  prophecy  from  an  earlier. J  The  mode  of 
interpretation  which  Professor  Jowett  advocated 
was  one  which  should  recognise  in  Scripture  a 
distinction  between  the  ideal  and  the  actual ; 
which  deemed  "  the  image  of  God  in  Christ "  to  be 
set  "  over  against  the  necessities  of  human  nature 
and  the  state  of  man  on  earth."  "  Our  Lord  Him- 
self," said  he,  "  recognises  this  distinction  when 
He  says,  '  Of  wdiom  do  the  kings  of  the  earth 
gather  tribute  ? '  and  '  then  are  the  children  free  ' 
(Matt.  xvii.  26).  And  again,  '  Notwithstanding 
lest  we  should  offend  them,'  &c."     But  he  gave  no 

*  Essays  and  Eevietvs,  12th  edition,  p.  459. 

t  lb.  p.  490.  X  lb.  p.  463. 


clue  as  to  the  grounds  on  which  so  strange  an 
interpretation  proceeded.* 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  above  notice  that  the 
mischievous  tendency  of  the  Essays  and  'Reviews  was 
manifold.  It  was  not,  indeed,  so  much  the  denial  of 
specific  Christian  doctrines — as,  for  instance,  those 
of  the  Trinity,  the  Hypostatic  Union,  sacramental 
grace,  the  supernatural  character  of  the  Church's 
calling,  standing,  and  life,  and  of  the  commission 
and  authority  possessed  by  her  ministers  ;  these,  if 
touched  upon,  were  for  the  most  part  dismissed  as 
mere  speculations  or  superstitions.  Eather,  how- 
ever, the  mischief  was  done  by  the  undermining,  by 
implication  or  insinuation,  of  faith  in  Divine  revela- 
tion, and  supernatural  working  in  general.  The 
dangerous  character  of  the  principles  thus  conveyed 
was  felt  by  High-Churchmen  and  Low-Churchmen 
alike.  The  Low-Church  Earl  of  Shaftesbury  de- 
nounced the  volume  in  a  public  speech  as  having 
been  vomited  forth  from  the  jaws  of  hell.  And  two 
suits  were  commenced  in  the  ecclesiastical  courts — 
the  one  by  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury  (Dr.  Hamilton) 
against  Dr.  Eowland  Williams,  who  was  beneficed  in 
the   Sarum   diocese,   and   the    other  by  the  Eev. 

*  We  should  have  thought  that  the  Lord's  argument  was 
sufBciently  plain.  It  is  grounded  on  the  analogy  between  the 
practice  of  earthly  kings  and  that  of  the  King  of  the  Universe. 
Earthly  kings  do  not  take  taxes  of  their  own  sons,  but  of  other 
people's  sons :  in  like  manner,  the  Son  of  God  (as  St.  Peter  had 
lately  owned  the  Lord  to  be)  shoiild  be  deemed  exempt  from 
paying  taxes  to  His  Father  in  heaven.  But  lest  the  making  such 
a  claim  should  lead  others  to  take  excuse  from  paying  that  tribute 
to  which  they  were  morally  as  well  as  lawfixlly  bound,  and  so  to 
sin,  the  Lord  would  not  insist  upon  His  rights,  but  waived  them, 
and  wrought  a  miracle  rather  than  leave  the  tribute  unpaid. 



James  Feiidall,  Eector  of  Haiiton  and  Vicar  of 
Comberton,  Cambridgeshire,  against  the  Eev.  H.  B. 
Wilson  ;  both  these  last-named  gentlemen  being 
beneficed  in  the  Diocese  of  Ely.  The  proceedings 
were  for  statements,  in  their  respective  essays, 
alleged  to  be  inconsistent  with  the  formularies  of 
the  Church  of  England. 

In  each  case,  unfortunately,  the  prosecution  took 
up  ground  which  was  questionable,  and  failed  to 
take  up  what  was  unquestionable.  The  defendants 
were  charged  with  publishing  opinions  which,  how- 
ever erroneous,  were  in  many  cases  matters  of 
bad  or  imperfect  criticism  rather  than  of  heresy. 
Mr.  Wilson,  for  instance,  had  pointed  out  how,  in 
his  opinion,  subscription  to  the  Thirty-nine  Articles 
might  be  understood.  He  mioiit  have  been  mis- 
taken  herein ;  but  it  was  wrong  to  prosecute  him 
for  saying  that  he  meant  his  own  subscription  to  be 
taken  in  such  and  such  a  sense,  and  deemed  that 
sense  to  be  neither  improper  nor  illegal.  Alluding,, 
too,  to  the  accounts  given  in  Scripture  of  Balaam's 
ass  speaking  with  man's  voice — of  witches,  and  a 
variety  of  apparitions — of  the  translation  of  Elijah 
— of  the  nature  of  angels — of  the  reality  of  demo- 
niacal possession — of  the  personality  of  Satan — he 
had  pointed  out  that  certain  views  of  Scripture, 
according  to  which  these  narratives  were  treated 
as  allegorical,  or  otherwise  as  unhistorical,*  were 
consistent  with  the  Sixth  Article :  and  so,  in  our 
opinion,  they  were,  however  erroneous  in  them- 
selves. But  they  were  in  some  cases  clearly  in- 
consistent with  a  profession  made  by  every  deacon 

*  Essays  and  Beviews,  -p  241. 

AND    MR.    H.    B.    WILSON.  149 

of  the  Church  of  England  at  his  ordination,  "  Do 
you  unfeignedly  beheve  all  the  Canonical  Scriptures 
of  the  Old  and  JSFew  Testament  ? — Answer :  I  do 
believe  them."  And  when  Mr.  Wilson  spoke  of 
■"  one  un]ia]?py  creed,"  *  and  of  "  doctrinal  limita- 
tions "  (i.e.  creeds)  as  being  obstacles  to  a  true 
Catholicity ,-!•  this  might  well  have  been  complained 
of  as  a  depravation  of  the  Creeds.  It  passed,  how- 
ever, without  specific  complaint.  Mr.  Eowland 
Williams,  in  like  manner,  had  many  things  laid  to 
his  charge,  only  a  few  whereof  could  reasonably 
be  deemed  ecclesiastical  offences  in  the  uttering. 
Such  offences  were,  his  intimating  that  the  angel 
who  destroyed  the  firstborn  of  the  Egyptians  might 
have  been  an  army  of  Bedouins ;  and  that  Abra- 
ham was  bidden  to  slay  his  son  under  the  fierce 
ritual  of  Syria.  So  also  when  Dr.  Williams  spoke 
of  the  Bible  as  being  an  expression  of  devout  reason. 
Against  Professor  Jowett  no  one  dared  take  any 
proceedings  ;  though  he  would,  we  think,  have  been 
unable  to  show  that  such  passages  as  some  which 
we  have  quoted  above  were  not  formal  deprava- 
tions of  the  Creeds  and  contradictory  to  the  Eighth 
Article  of  Eeligion.  The  like  may  be  said  of  Mr. 

On  the  25th  of  June,  1862,  Dr.  Lushington,  Dean 
of  the  Arches,  gave  judgment  on  both  suits.  In 
forming  it,  he  professed  to  have  made  no  ac- 
count of  the  opinions  either  of  living  prelates  on 
the  bench,  or  of  the  most  learned  and  orthodox 
Anglican  divines ;  but  to  have  looked,  as  he  said 
he  would  look  in  all  cases  of  doctrine,  "  first  to  the 

*  Essays  and  Reviews,  p.  180.  t  lb.  p.  200. 

150  arches'  judgment  reversed. 

Articles,  then  to  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  ;  and 
that  he  accounted  it  his  business  merely  to  ascertain 
the  true '  construction  of  the  Articles  and  other 
formularies  according  to  strict  legal  principles. 
Unfortunately,  in  interpreting  the  passage  cited 
above  from  the  Ordering  of  Deacons,  the  interpre- 
tation w^hicli  he  gave  as  the  minimum  of  strictness 
admissible  was  only  this : — "  a  bond  fide  belief 
that  the  Holy  Scriptures  contain  everything 
necessary  to  salvation,  and  that  to  that  extent 
they  have  the  direct  sanction  of  the  Almighty." 
Certain  passages,  however,  both  in  Dr.  Williams's 
essay,  and  also  in  that  of  Mr.  Wilson,  were  deemed 
by  him  inconsistent  with  the  Anglican  formularies, 
and  sentence  was  given  accordingly. 

Appeal  was  made  in  each  case  to  the  Judicial 
Committee  of  Privy  Council.  The  Committee  was, 
in  the  opinion  of  Bishop  Wilberforce  of  Oxford, 
"  evidently  packed  for  the  purpose  "  of  reversing 
Dr.  Lushington's  judgment,  "  no  one  who  ever  sat 
on  such  questions  having  been  put  upon  it."  * 
And  judgment  was  given  by  the  Lord  Chancellor 
on  the  8tli  of  February,  1864,  to  the  effect  that  the 
appellants  had  not  contradicted  in  terms  the  words 
of  Scripture  or  of  the  Articles  ;  and  on  this  ground 
the  Court  reversed  the  judgment  of  the  Court  of 
Arches.  On  this  the  Christian  Observer  remarked  : 
"  We  are  suffering  a  grievous  wrong  ;  and  re- 
dress from  our  ecclesiastical  courts,  as  at  present 
constituted,  is,  it  seems,  so  dilatory,  so  difficult, 
and  so  uncertain,  that  it  may  almost  be  said  to  be 
unattainable.     We  are  not  advocating  a  return  to 

*  Life  of  Bohert  Gray,  BisJi02)  of  Capetown,  vol.  ii.  p.  167. 


Star  Chambers  or  Courts  of  Hio-li  Commission ; 
but  some  tribunal  we  do  seem  to  want  in  which 
justice  may  be  done  without  enormous  expense  or 
unreasonable  delay."  *  This  line,  however,  was 
not  taken  by  Low-Churchmen  in  general.  On  the 
4th  of  December,  1864,  Mr.  Keble  dictated  a  letter 
to  the  Bishop  of  Capetown  (Dr.  Gray)  in  these 
terms  : — "  As  to  the  Essay  and  Review  grievance, 
there  had  been  delay  through  an  endeavour  to 
secure  the  co-operation  of  the  Low-Churchmen, 
but  they  are  naturally  afraid  of  damaging  the 
Gorham  judgment,  and  so  hang  back  for  the 
present."  f  The  Editor  of  the  Christian  Observer 
itself  was  unwilling  to  have  the  Court  of  Final 
Appeal  altered,  even  after  the  decision  in  the 
matter  of  the  Essays  and  Revieivs.^  As  for  Mr. 
Venn,  the  Secretary  of  the  "  Church  Missionary 
Society,"  he  wrote  to  his  brother  in  March  1861  : 
"  I  have  not  been  able  to  join  all  my  friends  in  their 
protests  against  the  Essays  and  Reviews,  simply 
because  I  could  not  join  in  a  protest  with  Pusey, 
Denison,  &c.  Surely  a  joint  signature  implies  that 
the  difference  between  the  signers  is  as  nothing 
compared  with  the  difference  between  the  other 
party  and  themselves.  This  I  cannot  allow. 
Besides  which,  do  we  and  the  Tractarians  mean 
the  same  thing  by  '  the  inspiration  of  Scripture  ?  ' 
I  think  not.  I  find,  however,  no  one  who  takes 
the  same  view  as  myself,  so  it  is  a  comfort  to 
explain  my  singularity  to  you."  § 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1864,  p.  240. 
t  Life  of  Bislio]]  Gray,  vol.  ii.  p.  176. 
X  Christian  Observer  for  1865,  p.  208. 
§  Knight's  Memoir  of  the  Bev.  H.  Venn,  pp.  329,  330. 

152  DR.    COLENSO,   BISHOP    OF   NATAL. 


Polemical  Period,  continued.  Bishop  Colenso  of  Natal.  His 
Heretical  Publications.  Proceedings  with  regard  to  him.  Line 
taken  by  the  Low-Church  Party. 

"  A  man  that  is  an  heretic  after  the  first  and  second  admonition 
reject." — Titus  iii.  10. 

The  Essays  and  Revieivs,  however,  were  speedily 
thrown  into  the  shade  by  the  pubhcation  of  two 
works  by  John  WiUiam  Colenso,  D.D.,  Lord  Bishop 
of  Natal,  in  South  Africa. 

The  commencement  of  the  South  African  Episco- 
pate of  the  Anglican  Communion  was  the  consecra- 
tion of  Dr.  Eobert  Gray  to  the  See  of  Capetown. 
Wlien  Bishop  Gray  first  went  out,  he  had  episcopal 
jurisdiction  in  all  the  English  colonies  in  South 
Africa.  Such  a  charge  was  obviously  too  great  for 
one  individual ;  and  Bishop  Gray  felt  this,  and 
before  he  departed  to  his  rest  he  had  the  comfort 
of  seeing  his  vast  diocese  divided,  and  two  other 
dioceses  formed  out  of  it,  Grahamstown  and  Natal, 
besides  a  bishopric  formed  for  the  Orange  Eiver 
Free  State.  And  it  was  owing  in  great  measure  to 
his  influence  that  Dr.  Colenso  was  consecrated  first 
Bishop  of  Natal.  At  that  time  the  ecclesiastical 
territory  in  South  Africa  was  constituted  a  province, 
with  Capetown  for  its  metropolitan  see  :  and  Dr. 
Colenso,  at  his  consecration,  took  the  following 
oath  : — "  In  the  name  of  God,  Amen.  I,  John 
William,  chosen  Bishop  of  the  Church  and  See  of 
Natal,  do  profess  and  promise  all  due  reverence  and 
obedience  to  the  Bishop  and  to  the  Metropolitical 


Church  of  Capetown,  and  to  their  successors  :  So 
help  me  God,  through  Jesus  Christ."  The  events 
now  to  be  narrated  happened  for  the  most  part  in 
Africa,  but  the  narration  of  them  falls  within  the 
scope  of  the  present  work,  inasmuch  as  the  force 
of  them  was  felt  throughout  the  Anglican  Com- 
munion ;  and  we  shall  be  concerned  to  mark  what 
line  with  respect  to  them  was  taken  by  the  Low- 
Church  party  in  England. 

In  June  1861  the  Bishop  of  Natal  published  a 
new  translation  and  exposition  of  St.  Paul's  Epistle 
to  the  Eomans  :  which  occasioned  the  Bishop  of 
Capetown  to  ask  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
by  letter  (November  12)  whether  the  Bishop's 
teaching  was  so  erroneous  that  the  Church  ought 
to  rid  herself  of  the  guilt  of  sharing  it ;  if  so,  then 
in  what  way — whether  by  synodical  condemnation, 
or  trial,  or  in  some  other  way.  And  in  May  1862 
many  English  bishops  met  together  for  the  purpose 
of  considering  these  questions. 

Meanwhile  the  Bishop  of  Natal  had  printed  and 
circulated  privately  the  First  Part  of  another  work, 
viz.  The  Pentateuch  and  Book  of  Joshua,  Critically 
Examined :  and  was  following  his  metropolitan  to 
England  with  the  intention  of  publishing  it  there. 
It  was  published  in  October  following,  and  at 
once  raised  a  great  consternation.  Preparation  had 
been  made  for  the  promulgation  of  the  Bishop's 
opinions  by  a  note  in  the  Essays  and  Hevieivs, 
where  Mr.  Bristow  Wilson  had  written,  "  Previous 
to  the  time  of  the  divided  kingdom  the  Jewish 
history  presents  little  which  is  thoroughly  reliable. 
The  taking  of  Jerusalem  by  '  Shishak '  is  for  the 


Hebrew  history  that  which  the  sacking  of  Eome  by 
the  Gauls  is  for  the  Eomaii.  And  from  no  facts 
ascertainable  is  it  possible  to  infer  there  was  an 
early  period  during  which  the  government  by  the 
priesthood  was  attended  with  success.  Indeed 
the  greater  probability  seems  on  the  side  of  the 
supposition  that  the  priesthood,  with  its  distinct 
offices  and  charges,  was  constituted  by  royalty ; 
and  that  the  higher  pretensions  of  the  priests  were 
not  advanced  till  the  reign  of  Josiah.  .  .  Samuel, 
however,  with  whose  government  the  Israelites 
were  dissatisfied,  was  not  a  priest,  but  a  prophet ; 
and  the  whole  of  that  part  of  the  narrative  is 
conceived  in  the  prophetical,  not  in  the  priestly 
interests."  *  And  now  a  bishop  of  the  Anglican 
Communion  rushed  into  print  to  show  not  only 
"  that  the  Pentateuch,  as  a  whole,  cannot  possibly 
have  been  written  by  Moses,  or  by  anyone  ac- 
quainted personally  with  the  facts  which  it  pro- 
fesses to  describe,"  but  also  "  that  the  (so-called) 
Mosaic  narrative,  by  whomsoever  written,  cannot 
be  regarded  as  historically  true."  In  January 
1863  was  published  the  Second  Part ;  and  the 
Third  Part  later  on  in  the  same  year. 

On  the  4th  of  February  was  held  a  large  meeting 
of  bishops  at  Queen  Anne's  Bounty  Ofiice.  It  was 
attended  by  the  ArchbishojDS  of  Canterbury  (Dr. 
Longley),  York  (Dr.  Thomson),  and  Armagh 
(Lord  John  George  Beresford) ;  by  the  Bishops 
of  London  (Dr.  Tait),  Durham  (Dr.  Baring),  Win- 
chester (Dr.  Sumner),  Oxford  (Dr.  Wilberforce), 
Bangor    (Dr.    Campbell),   Lincoln   (Dr.    Jackson), 

*  Essays  and  Revieivs,  12th  edition,  p.  203,  note. 


Worcester  (Dr.  Pliilpott),  Llandaff  (Dr.   Ollivant), 
Carlisle  (Dr.  Waldegrave),  Eochester  (Dr.  Wigram), 
Gloucester  and  Bristol  (Dr.  Ellicott),  Manchester 
(Dr.  Prince  Lee),  Chichester  (Dr.  Gilbert),  Exeter 
(Dr.  Philpotts),  St.  Asaph  (Dr.  Short),  Chester  (Dr. 
Graham),  Sahsbury  (Dr.  Hamilton),  St.  Davids  (Dr. 
Thirlwall),  Bath  and  Wells  (Lord  Auckland),  Sodor 
and  Man  (Dr.  Powis) ;  also  by  Bishop  Hampden  of 
Hereford,  and  the  Bishops  of  Derry  (Dr.  Higgins), 
Down  (Dr.    Knox),  Montreal   (Dr.    Fulford),    and 
Tasmania  (Dr.  Nixon).  The  Society  for  the  Propaga- 
tion of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts  had  asked  ad- 
vice from  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  as  to  their 
duty  in  regard  of  the  Bishop  of  Natal :    whether 
they  ought  to  elect  him  again  as  one  of  their  Vice- 
Presidents,  and  whether  he  ought  to  be  permitted 
to  administer  the  funds  of  the  Society.     And  the 
Archbishop  now  asked   counsel  of  his  brethren: 
should  he  give  any  advice  at  all  to  the  Society  ? 

The  Bishop  of  Winchester  wanted  to  know  whe- 
ther any  legal  proceedings  were  to  be  taken.  He 
would  inhibit  the  Bishop  of  Natal  from  officiating  in 
the  Diocese  of  Winchester,  even  if  legal  proceedings 
were  taken  as  well.  The  Bishop  of  Durham  thought 
that  they  ought  not  to  wait  for  legal  proceedings. 
The  Bishop  of  Chichester  deemed  that  he  for  his 
part  must  certainly  inhibit  the  Bishop  of  Natal. 

Then  a  resolution  was  proposed  by  the  Bishop 
of  Oxford,  stating  that  the  Bishops  who  signed  it 
agreed  to  inhibit  the  Bishop  of  Natal  from  officiat- 
ing in  their  several  dioceses.  It  was  supported 
by  the  Bishop  of  Llandaff,  but  opposed  by  the 
Archbishop  of  York. 


The  Bishop  of  Manchester  said  that  he  wished 
for  a  declaration,  not  an  inhibition  of  the  Bishop 
of  NataL  The  Bishop  of  Eochester  said  that  he 
had  inhibited  the  Bishop  of  Natal  already.  Finally, 
however,  the  resolution  proposed  by  the  Bishop  of 
Oxford  was  carried  by  twenty-five  votes  against 
four  ;  the  four  dissentients  being  the  Archbishop 
of  York,  and  the  Bishops  of  London,  St.  David's, 
and  Manchester. 

It  was  also  agreed  to  appoint  a  committee  for 
preparing  a  document  which  all  might  sign.  A 
few  days  latter,  the  document  was  prepared  in  the 
form  of  a  letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Natal;  which, 
being  read,  was  adopted,  and  signed  by  forty-one 
bishops,  the  only  dissentient  being  the  Bishop  of 
St.  David's.  In  this  letter  the  Bishop  of  Natal  was 
called  upon  to  resign  his  office,  on  the  ground  that 
he  had  professed  himself  unable  to  believe  any 
longer  what  he  had  professed  to  believe  before, 
such  profession  of  belief  having  been  an  indispen- 
sable condition  of  admission  to  his  office.  Other 
grounds  alleged  for  the  Bishop's  resignation  were, 
his  having  declared  himself  unable  to  use  the 
offices  for  ordination  and  baptism  as  prescribed 
by  the  Church. 

And  on  the  11th  of  February  a  motion  was 
brought  forward  in  the  Lower  House  of  Convo- 
cation by  Archdeacon  Denison,  seconded  by  the 
Low-Churchman  Dr.  M'Caul  (of  Hebraistic  fame), 
and  carried,  "That  the  standing  orders  be  post- 
poned in  order  to  the  moving  of  an  address  praying 
the  Upper  House  to  direct  the  appointment  of  a 
committee  to  examine  Bishop  Colenso's  book  on  the 


Pentateuch,  and  to  report  whether  any,  and  if  so, 
what,  opinions,  heretical  or  erroneous  in  doctrine, 
it  contained." 

So  much  for  the  hne  taken  by  Church  authorities 
at  home,  Low-Churchmen  included.  We  must  now 
turn  our  attention  to  Africa. 

In  May  the  Dean  of  Capetown,  the  Very  Eev. 
Henry  Alexander  Douglas  (afterwards  Bishop  of 
Bombay),  the  Archdeacon  of  Grahamstown  (the 
Ven.  Nathanael  James  Merriman,  afterwards  Bishop 
of  Grahamstown),  and  the  Archdeacon  of  George 
(the  Ven.  Hopkins  Badnall),  signed  a  Presentment 
of  the  Bishop  of  Natal,  and  addressed  it  to  the 
Metropolitan,  Bishop  Gray  of  Capetown ;  who 
thereupon  cited  the  Bishop  of  Natal  to  appear 
before  him  in  the  Cathedral  at  Capetown  and  an- 
swer to  the  charges  contained  in  the  Presentment. 
Those  charges  were  expressed  in  the  following- 
terms,  each  charge  being  preceded  by  extracts  from 
one  or  more  of  Bishop  Colenso's  published  works, 
and  extracts  from,  or  references  to,  authorised  for- 
mularies of  the  Anglican  Communion,  which  Bishop 
Colenso  was  alleged  to  have  contravened  : — 

That  in  the  extracts  contained  in  Schedule  I., 
the  writer,  maintaining  that  our  blessed  Lord  did 
not  die  in  man's  stead,  or  bear  the  punishment  or 
penalty  of  our  sins,  and  that  God  is  not  reconciled 
to  us  by  the  death  of  His  Son,  impugns  and  con- 
tradicts the  Catholic  faith  as  expressed  in  the 
Articles,  &c.,  above  set  forth  and  referred  to. 

That  in  the  extracts  contained  in  Schedule  H., 
the  writer,  maintaining  that  justification  is  a  con- 
sciousness of  being  counted  righteous,  and  that  all 


men,  even  without  such  consciousness,  are  treated 
by  God  as  righteous,  and  counted  righteous,  and 
that  all  men,  as  members  of  the  great  human 
family,  are  dead  unto  sin  and  risen  again  unto 
righteouness,  denies  that  men  are  justified  by  faith, 
and  impugns  and  contradicts  the  Articles,  &c., 
above  set  forth  and  referred  to. 

That  in  the  extracts  contained  in  Schedule  III., 
the  writer,  maintaining  that  all  men  have  the  new 
birth  unto  righteousness  in  their  very  birth-hour, 
that  is  to  say,  are  regenerate  when  born  into  the 
world,  as  members  of  the  great  human  family  ;  and 
also  that  all  men  are  at  all  times  partaking  of  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ,  denies  that  the  holy 
Sacraments  are  generally  necessary  to  salvation, 
and  that  they  convey  any  special  grace,  and  fur- 
ther denies  that  faith  is  the  means  whereby  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  is  [sic^  received  and 
eaten,  and  that  faith  is  necessary  in  order  that  the 
grace  bestowed  by  God  in  sacraments  may  have  a 
wholesome  effect  and  operation,  and  therefore  im- 
pugns and  contradicts  the  Catholic  faith  as  expressed 
in  the  Articles,  &c.,  above  set  forth  and  referred  to. 

That  in  the  extracts  contained  in  Schedule  IV., 
the  writer,  maintaining  that  he  cannot  any  longer 
maintain  or  give  utterance  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
endlessness  of  future  punishment,  impugns  and 
contradicts  the  Catholic  faith  as  expressed  in  the 
Articles,  &c.,  above  set  forth  and  referred  to. 

That  in  the  extracts  contained  in  Schedule  V., 
the  writer,  maintaining  that  the  Holy  Scriptures 
contain  the  Word  of  God,  but  are  not  the  Word  of 
God,  impugns    and  contradicts  the  Catholic  faith 


as  expressed  in  the  Articles,  &c.,  above  set  forth 
and  referred  to. 

That  in  the  extracts  contained  in  Schedule  VI., 
the  Holy  Scriptures  are  spoken  of  and  treated  as  a 
merely  human  book,  not  inspired  by  God  the  Holy 
Spirit,  or  inspired  only  in  such  a  manner  as  other 
books  may  be  inspired,  and  that  so  to  speak  and 
treat  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  is  to  impugn  and 
contradict  the  Catholic  faith  as  expressed  in  the 
Articles,  &c.,  above  set  forth  and  referred  to. 

That  in  the  extracts  contained  in  Schedule  VII., 
the  authenticity,  genuineness,  and  truth  of  certain 
books  of  Holy  Scripture  in  whole  or  in  part  are 
denied ;  and  that  by  this  denial,  the  authority  and 
canonicity  of  these  books  in  whole  or  in  part  are 
called  in  question,  and  denied  in  contravention  of 
the  Catholic  faith  as  expressed  in  the  Articles,  &c., 
above  set  forth  and  referred  to. 

That  in  the  extracts  contained  in  Schedule  VIII. , 
the  writer  maintaining  that  our  Blessed  Lord  was 
ignorant  and  in  error  upon  the  subject  of  the 
authorship  and  age  of  the  different  portions  of  the 
Pentateuch,  denies  the  doctrine  that  our  Blessed 
Lord  is  God  and  man  in  one  person,  and  by  this 
denial  impugns  and  contradicts  the  Catholic  faith 
as  expressed  in  the  Articles,  &c.,  above  set  forth 
and  referred  to. 

The  charge  preferred  under  the  extracts  in 
Schedule  IX.  was  fully  set  forth  in  a  letter,  addressed 
to  the  Metropolitan,  which  was  annexed  to  the 
Presentment,  and  of  which  the  following  passage 
contains  the  charge  in  question  : — "  With  respect 
to  the  extracts  contained  in  the  ninth  schedule,  we 
charge  the   Bishop  of  Natal  with  depraving,  im- 


pugning,  and  otlierwise  bringing  into  disrepute  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  particularly  portions  of 
tlie  Ordinal  and  the  Baptismal  Services,  and  in  so 
doing  with  violating  the  law  of  the  United  Church 
of  England  and  Ireland,  as  contained  in  the  36th 
of  the  Constitutions  and  Canons  Ecclesiastical."* 

The  trial  began  on  the  17th  of  November, 
1863,  in  St.  George's  Cathedral,  Capetown.  The 
Metropolitan  presided,  assisted  by  the  Bishops  of 
Grahamstown  and  Orange  Eiver  Free  State.  The 
three  clergymen  who  had  signed  the  Presentment 
were  present  as  accusers  ;  and  the  Bishop  of  Natal 
had  sent  a  Dr.  Bleek  to  be  present  as  his  personal 
friend,  and  to  protest  against  the  proceedings. 
Dr.  Bleek  was  known  to  be  an  unbeliever  ;  and 
when,  in  the  course  of  the  trial,  he  was  formally 
asked  whether  he  was  a  member  of  the  Church 
of  England,  or  of  any  communion  which  would 
recotynise  its  formularies,  he  declined  to  answer 
the  question. f  The  trial  was  continued  on  the 
18th  of  November  and  two  following  days.  On 
the  21st,  as  the  Bishop  of  Natal  had  not  appeared, 
and  Dr.  Bleek  would  not  go  beyond  his  instruc- 
tions, which  were  that  he  should  do  no  more  than 
protest,  the  Dean,  who  was  the  first  in  the  prose- 
cution, went  through,  point  by  point,  that  letter 
of  the  Bishop  of  Natal  to  the  Metropolitan  which 
had  been  read  the  day  before,  and  which  the  Court 
accepted  as  containing  the  substance  of  what  the 
Bishop  would  have  said  in  his  own  defence  had  he 

On  the  14tli  of  December  the  Court  sat  again  to 

*  Life  of  Bisliop  Gray,  vol.  ii.  pp.  593,  &c. 
t  Ih.  p.  79. 


hear  the  opinions  of  the  two  bishops  who  had 
been  the  Metropohtan's  assessors.  And  on  the 
16th  the  Metropohtan  himself  gave  judgment ; 
which  was,  that  the  Bishop  of  Natal,  having  been 
convicted  of  false  teaching  on  many  grave  and 
fundamental  points,  involving  a  wide  and  syste- 
matic departure  from  the  faith,  was  unfit,  so  lono- 
as  he  should  persist  in  those  errors,  to  bear  rule 
in  the  Church  of  God,  or  to  exercise  any  sacred 
offices  whatever  therein.  In  this  opinion,  said  the 
Metropolitan,  and  in  the  sentence  which  he  was 
about  to  pass,  his  assessors  entirely  agreed.  He 
added  that  if  it  was  desired  to  make  a  formal 
appeal  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  he  would 
consent  to  forward  his  judgment  to  the  Archbishop 
for  revision,  waiving  in  that  particular  case  any 
real  or  supposed  rights  of  what  he  termed  "  this 
Church"  (meaning,  no  doubt,  either  the  metro- 
political  Church  of  Capetown,  or  the  whole  feder- 
ation of  Anglican  churches  in  South  Africa).  It 
would,  he  felt,  be  a  very  great  relief  to  submit  his 
decision  to  the  chief  pastor  of  the  Church  at  home, 
and  to  share  his  responsil^ilities  with  him,  and,  if 
he  should  see  fit,  with  the  other  bishops  of  the 
National  Church.  Then  followed  the  technical 
sentence  by  which  the  Bishop  of  Natal  was  deposed 
from  his  office,  and  prohibited  from  the  exercise 
of  any  Divine  office  within  any  part  of  the  metro- 
political  Province  of  Capetown. 

The  operation  of  the  sentence  was  suspended 
until  the  16th  of  April,  1864  ;  when,  if  the  Bishop 
had  not  retracted  all  the  errors  of  which  he  had 
been  convicted,  it  was  to  be  published  in  all  the 

n.  12 


churches  of  the  Diocese  of  Natal,  and  in  the  several 
cathedral  churches  of  the  Province  of  Capetown. 
No  retractation,  however,  having  been  made,  it 
was  served  on  Bishop  Colenso  on  the  31st  of  May. 
The  Bishop  petitioned  the  Queen  against  it ;  and 
his  petition  was  referred  to  the  Judicial  Committee 
of  Privy  Council,  which  sat  to  hear  the  arguments 
on  the  14tli  of  December.  Sir  Hugh  Cairns  (after- 
wards Earl  Cairns)  and  the  Queen's  Advocate 
appeared  for  the  Metropolitan ;  stated  the  Metro- 
politan's protest  against  the  imjDlied  jurisdiction  of 
the  Crown  in  the  subject-matter  of  Bishop  Colenso's 
petition,  and  against  the  idea  that  any  appeal  lay 
from  his  proceedings  therein  either  to  the  Crown 
or  to  the  Judicial  Committee;  and  stated  also  four 
reasons  why  Bishop  Colenso's  appeal  should  not 
be  allowed ;  praying,  moreover,  that  their  Lord- 
ships would  pronounce  for  the  protest  of  the 
Metro|)olitan,  and  against  the  said  pretended  com- 
plaint and  appeal.  Judgment  was  given  against 
the  Metropolitan  on  the  20th  of  March,  1865  ;  the 
lords  present  being  the  Lord  Chancellor  (Lord 
Cranworth),  Lord  Kingsdown,  the  Dean  of  Arches 
(Dr.  Lushington),  and  the  Master  of  the  EoUs  (Sir 
Joseph  Eomilly).*  These  learned  men  decided 
that  the  Metropolitan's  sentence  on  Bishop  Colenso 
was  "  null  and  void  in  law." 

On  the  28th  of  June,  1865,  the  bishops  of  the 
Province  of  Canterbury  agreed  in  Convocation  to 
an  address  to  the  President,  asking  him  to  convey 
to  the  Bishop  of  Capetown  and  the  bishops  who  sat 
with  him  to  try  Bishop  Colenso  the  expression  of 

*  Life  of  Bishoj)  Gray,  vol.  ii.  Appendix  VIII. 


their  "  hearty  admiration  of  the  courage,  firmness, 
and  devoted  love  of  the  truth  of  the  Gospel  as  this 
Church  has  received  the  same,  which  has  [said 
they]  been  manifested  by  him  and  them  under  most 
difficult  and  trying  circumstances.  We  thank  them 
[the  Bishops  continued]  for  the  noble  stand  they 
have  made  against  heretical  and  false  doctrine," 
&c.*  This  was  proposed  by  the  Bishop  of  Oxford, 
seconded  by  the  Bishop  of  LlandafF,  and  carried. 
Being'  brought  before  the  Lower  House  of  Convo- 
cation,  it  was  opposed  by  Dean  Stanley  and  Sir 
Henry  Thompson. 

The  deposed  bishop  returned  to  the  Diocese  of 
Natal,  and  on  Sunday,  the  17th  of  November,  1865, 
said  Mattins  and  Litany,  and  preached  a  sermon  in 
the  Cathedral  of  Maritzburg,  in  spite  of  the  protests 
of  the  Dean  and  churchwardens. 

Meanwhile  the  Metropolitan  had  held  a  Provin- 
cial Synod  of  bishops,  which  resolved  unanimously  f 
that  in  the  event  of  Bishop  Colenso's  presuming  to 
exercise  episcopal  functions  in  the  Diocese  of  Natal 
after  the  Metropolitan's  sentence  should  have  been 
notified  to  him,  and  in  case  of  his  declining  to  ap- 
peal to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  of  his 
not  being  restored  by  his  Metropolitan,  he  would 
be  ipso  facto  excommunicate  ;  and  that  it  would  be 
the  Metropolitan's  duty,  in  such  a  contingency,  and 
after  due  admonition,  to  pronounce  the  formal 
sentence  of  exconmiunication.J  And  in  fulfilment 
of  this  resolution,  the  sentence  was  j^assed  under 
the  Metropolitan's  hand  and  seal  on  the  16th  of 

*  Life  of  Bishop  Gray,  vol.  ii.  pp.  212,  213. 
§  Ih.  pp.  240,  255.  \  lb.  p.  240. 



December,  and  publislied  by  the  Dean  of  Maritz- 
burg  in  Maritzburg  Cathedral  on  Sunday,  the  7th* 
of  January,  1866. 

In  the  Convocation  of  Canterbury  the  Archbishop, 
on  the  2nd  of  May  in  the  same  year,  proposed 
three  questions  :  one  from  the  Bishop  of  Capetov^n, 
vp-hether  the  Cliurch  of  England  was  in  communion 
with  Bishop  Colenso  or  with  the  bishops  who  had 
excommunicated  him ;  and  two  from  the  Dean  of 
Maritzburg,  viz.  whether  the  acceptance  of  a  new 
bishop  on  the  part  of  the  Diocese  of  Natal  while 
Dr.  Colenso  retained  his  letters  patent  would  in 
any  way  sever  the  diocese  from  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land ;  and,  in  the  event  of  a  negative  answer,  what 
were  the  proper  steps  for  them  to  take  for  obtain- 
ing a  new  bishop. 

In  the  course  of  a  warm  debate  which  then  en- 
sued, and  which  was  resumed  the  next  da}^  the 
Bishop  of  Peterborough  (Dr.  Jeune)  said  that  he 
did  not  think  it  needful  for  the  Convocation  to  say 
to  the  Colonial  Church,  "  Consecrate  a  bishop  for 
Natal,"  though  he  was  by  no  means  prepared  to 
say  it  might  not  be  their  duty  so  to  do.  In  reply 
to  the  first  question  of  the  three,  the  Upper  House 
gave  no  answer  to  the  former  part  of  it,  but  an- 
swered the  latter  part  affirmatively.  With  regard 
to  the  second  question,  it  was  resolved  that  the 
existence  of  the  letters  patent  would  not  cause 
the  acceptance  of  a  new  bishop  by  the  diocese  to 
involve  any  loss  of  communion  with  the  Church 
of  En^fland.     And  with  rei^ard  to  the  third,  it  was 

*  Bishop  Gray's  son  and  biographer  says,  "  Sunday,  January  5." 
But  the  5th  of  January  in  that  5'ear  was  Friday. 


resolved  that  if  the  consecration  of  a  new  bishop 
should  be  determined,  a  formal  instrument  declar- 
ing the  doctrine  and  discij^line  of  the  Church  of 
South  Africa  should  be  prepared,  and  that  every 
bishop,  priest  and  deacon  appointed  to  office  in 
that  Church  should  be  required  to  subscribe  it ; 
that  a  godly  and  well-learned  man  should  be  chosen 
by  the  clergy  with  the  assent  of  the  lay-communi- 
cants of  the  Church ;  and  then  that  he  should  be 
presented  for  consecration  either  to  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  or  else  to  the  bishops  of  South 
Africa.  After  years  of  wearisome  delay,  this  ex- 
pression of  opinion  was  carried  into  effect  in  the 
consecration  of  William  Kenneth  Macrorie,  Perpe- 
tual Curate  of  Accrington,  Lancashire,  to  fill  the 
vacant  pastorate.  This  was  done  in  the  Cathedral 
of  Capetown,  by  the  Metropolitan,  assisted  by  the 
Bishops  of  Grahamstown,  St.  Helena,  and  Orange 
Biver  Free  State,  on  the  Feast  of  the  Conversion  of 
St.  Paul,  1869. 

And  how  were  the  proceedings  of  the  Bishop  of 
Capetown  regarded  by  the  Low-Church  party  at 
home  ?  In  ancient  times  no  orthodox  bishop,  no 
orthodox  Christian,  would  have  hesitated.  The 
refusal  of  the  Convocation  of  Canterbur}^  to  pro- 
nounce whether  the  Church  of  England  was  or  was 
not  in  communion  with  Bishop  Colenso  arose,  pro- 
bably, from  the  fact  that  the  Church  of  England 
was  theoretically  one  with  the  English  State,  and 
from  a  fear  on  the  part  of  the  bishops  of  being 
committed,  as  they  might  be,  for  aught  that  they 
knew,  to  a  course  which  might  make  against  the 
constitution  of  the  country.     How  far  such  a  fear 


was  excusable  in  men  who  in  their  baptism  had  re- 
nounced the  vain  pomp  and  glory  of  the  world,  so 
that  they  would  not  follow  nor  be  led  thereby,  is  a 
question  on  which  it  does  not  behove  us  to  pass 
judgment.     We  only  remark  that  such  a  fear  as  we 
have  mentioned  was  probably  felt,andled,  probably, 
to  the  conclusion  mentioned  above.    And  it  is  likely 
that  the  same  feeling  influenced  the  Low-Church 
party  in  general,  which  had  always  had  some  leaning 
towards  Erastianism,  and  whose  Church  principles 
consisted  mainly  in  the   admission  that  the  esta- 
blishment of  religion  was  obligatory  on  a  Christian 
state,  and  that  whatever  was  ordered  by  the  civil 
ruler,   and  not  forbidden  in  Canonical  Scripture, 
might  lawfully  be  done  by  members  of  the  Church. 
Over  and  above  this,  however,  the  Low-Church 
party  had  reasons  of  their  own  for  standing  aloof 
from  Bishop  Gray  and  those  who  sympathised  with 
him,  even  though  they  did  not  hold  at  all  with 
Bishop  Colenso.    The  action  of  the  Church  in  South 
Africa  had  proceeded  on  the  principle  of  the  innate 
spiritual  authority  of  the  episcopate,  irrespective 
of  recognition  by  civil  rulers  :  and  upon  such  spiri- 
tual pretensions  a  Low-Churchman  looked  with  sus- 
picion, if  not  with  absolute  reprobation,  and  could 
not  see  any  difference  between  what  was  done  in 
the   nineteenth  century  by  Eobert   Gray,  Bishop 
of   Capetown,    and   what   had  been  done    in   the 
eleventh  by  Hildebrand,  Bishop  of  Eome.     Thus, 
when  the  Pan- Anglican  Conference  presumed,  said 
the  Christian  Observer,  "  to  deprive  him  [Bishop 
Colenso]  of  all  the  spiritual  authority  that  belongs 
to  his  office,  to  close  his  diocese  against  him,  and 


to  urge  his  clergy  •  .  .  not  only  to  refuse 
Mm  canonical  obedience,  but,  as  far  as  they  can, 
to  deny  him  the  use  of  their  pulpits,"  *  this  was 
but  a  manifestation  of  "  priestly  arrogance  :  "  and 
why  ?  Because  "  the  law  says  he  is  still  the  legal 
Bishop  of  Natal !  "  f  And  on  the  consecration  of 
Dr.  Macrorie  as  Bishop  of  Maritzburg,  the  Chris- 
tian Observer  remarked  :  "  As  true  members  of  the 
Church  of  this  realm  as  by  law  established,  we 
cannot  otherwise  characterise  the  proceeding  than 
as  a  deliberate  act  of  schism."  Bishop  Gray  ought, 
according  to  the  Editor,  to  have  cited  the  Bishop 
of  Natal  before  the  Queen  on  a  charge  of  his  griev- 
ous heresy  as  being  a  violation  of  the  fundamental 
principles  of  the  letters  patent,  as  a  reason  for  their 
being  cancelled  ;  this  course  having  been  deemed 
open,  according  to  the  judgment  of  Lord  Eomilly.  "^ 
Nor  was  this  all.  The  grounds  on  which  Bishop 
Colenso  had  been  condemned  were  not  only  his 
denial  of  Christ's  vicarious  sacrifi(ie,  of  justification 
by  faith,  of  the  Bible  as  being  the  Word  of  God, 
and  of  its  writers  as  having  been  specially  inspired 
by  God  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  also  his  implicit  denial 
of  sacramental  grace.  Bishop  Colenso's  accusers 
had  charged  him  with  denying  that  the  Sacra- 
ments convey  any  special  grace.  The  doctrine  that 
the  Sacraments  do  convey  such  grace,  or,  in  other 
words,  that  grace  is  bestowed  by  God  in  them,  had 
been  taught  by  the  rulers  of  the  Church  in  South 
Africa  from  the  first,  and  therefore,  as  Bishop  Gray 
wrote  in  1863,  the  i?ec(9r<i  and  its  admirers  had  cast 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1868,  p.  207. 
t  lb.  p.  206.  X  lb.  for  1869. 


out  the  names  of  them  and  of  their  clergy  for  evil 
during  many  years.*  And  so  the  proceedings  of 
Bishop  Gray  were  regarded  (and  perhaps  truly)  as 
violating  every  Protestant  principle  ;  and  the  con- 
demnation of  heresy  on  those  points  whereon  Bishop 
Colenso  was  heretical  was  deemed  only  a  second- 
ary matter. f  And  the  fact  that  Bishop  Gray  and 
his  comprovincials  had  fought  for  some  doctrines 
which  Low-Church  people  held  was  no  reason  why 
Low-Church  people  should  approve  of  their  fighting, 
in  the  same  battle,  for  other  doctrines  which  Low- 
Church  people  in  general  practically  denied.  Thus 
it  was  that  in  November  1867  Bishop  Gray  came 
to  write :  "  Though  I  have  been  called  to  defend 
the  chief  matters  which  Evangelicals  pride  them- 
selves on  maintaining  more  than  others— e.^.  the  in- 
spiration of  Holy  Scripture,  the  doctrines  of  original 
sin,  the  sacrifice  of  our  Lord  upon  the  cross  as  an 
expiation  for  sin,  justification  by  faith,  &c. — that 
school  not  only  stands  aloof  and  renders  me  no  sup- 
port, but  even  strives  to  induce  others  to  do  so.  It 
was  only  the  other  day  that  I  was  told  that  a  party 
of  clergy  of  this  school  met  together  and  denounced 
one  of  their  number  who  had  expressed  his  inten- 
tion of  being  present  at  a  sermon  and  meeting  of 
mine."  J  And  the  Editor  of  the  Christian  Observer 
remarked  that  although  Dr.  Colenso  was  unfit  to  be 
a  bishop,  yet  it  was  doubtful  whether  the  Bishop  of 
Capetown  had  any  right  to  supersede  him  :  "  and 
we  are  not  to  do  evil  that  good  may  come."  § 

*  Life  of  Bishop  Gray,  vol.  ii.  p.  G3. 

t  Christian  Observer  for  1868,  p.  209. 

I  Life  of  J^islioj)  Gray,  vol.  ii.  pp.  8G8,  369. 

§   Christian  Observer  for  1865,  p.  79. 


To  do  the  Low-Church  party  justice,  however, 
several  of  their  bishops  gave  Bishop  Gray  their 
warm  support ;  at  least  as  much  as  High-Church- 
men. Mr.  Keble,  writing  to  the  Bishop  of  Cape- 
town on  Low  Sunday  1864,  speaks  of  a  "  sort  of 
coalition  "  between  him  and  other  High-Churchmen 
on  the  one  hand,  and  Low-Churchmen  on  the  other, 
against  Bishop  Colenso's  opinions.  And  in  another 
letter,  dated  June  4,  he  speaks  of  "  nearly  12,000 
clergy"  who  had  "publicly  disavowed  and  branded 
the  heresies  :  "  which  number  must  have  included 
several  thousand  Low-Churchmen.  In  July  1868 
the  Bishop  of  Llandaff  (Dr.  OUivant),  in  discussing 
the  question  of  the  report  of  a  committee  of  bishops 
appointed  by  Convocation  to  consider  Bishop 
Colenso's  deposition,  made  a  learned  disquisition 
against  the  Erastianism  of  the  Bishop  of  London 
(Dr.  Tait),  and  ended  "  by  affirming  that  it  was  not 
possible  '  to  come  to  any  other  conclusion  than  that 
the  Bishop  of  Capetown  did  everything  that  was 
essential  to  the  justice  of  the  case,' "  and  moved 
accordingly  the  adoption  of  the  report.  Bishop 
Campbell  also,  of  Bangor,  supported  the  adoption 
of  the  report.*  As  for  the  insulting  conduct  shown 
by  the  Archbishop  of  York  towards  his  brother 
metropolitan  in  refusing  to  receive  the  intimation 
sent  him  by  the  latter  of  Dr.  Macrorie's  consecra- 
tion, f  that  is  probal^ly  to  be  explained  rather  on 

*  Life  of  Bishop  Gray,  vol.  ii.  pp.  428,  &c. 

t  On  the  17tli  of  June,  1869,  the  Bishop  of  Capetown  wrote  : 
*'  York  has  sent  back  my  letter  to  him  communicating  Macrorie's 
consecration,  and  requesting  him  to  communicate  the  fact  to  the 
Bishops  of  his  province.  It  has  come  to  me  with  '  refused  '  on  the 
outside  ! !  !  " — Life  of  Bishop  Gray,  vol.  ii.  pp.  474-5. 


the  ground  of  the  Archbishop's  intense  Erastianism 
than  on  the  grounds  of  anything  else.    There  were, 
and  probably  there  still  are,  persons  with  whom 
devotion  to  the  civil  power  is  the  supreme  habit 
of  religion  :  to  whom  the  precept  "  Eender  unto 
Csesar  the  things  that  are  Csesar's  "  eclipses  every 
other  ;  as  when  the  chief  priests  of  the  Jews  de- 
clared, "We  have  no  king  but   Csesar."  *      The 
Editor  of  the  Record  rejoiced  when,  Dean  WiUiams 
of  Grahamstown  having  joined  the  Colenso  party, 
and  taken  with  him  the  cathedral  property,  and 
Bishop  Merriman  having  appealed  from  the  colo- 
nial court  to  the  Privy  Council,  sentence  was  given 
against  him  in  July  1882.     The  grounds  of  the  joy 
appear  to  have  been  the  consideration  pointed  out 
by  the  Judicial  Committee,  that  the  reservation  of 
rights  made  by  the  Church  of  South  Africa  "  would 
tend  to  silence  and  to  exclude  those  whom  the  de- 
cisions of  her  Majesty  in  Council  would  protect  in 
the  Church  of  England,"  f  but  who,  tested  fairly 
by  the  authorised  standards,  would  have  in  justice 
to  be  silenced  and  excluded. 

It  may  be  well  to  remark  here  that  when,  after 
the  death  of  Bishop  Colenso,  his  party  in  South 
Africa  sought  to  get  a  new  bishop  in  succession 
to  him,  and  irrespectively  of  the  Metropolitan  and 
Church  of  South  Africa,  the  prelates  to  whom  they 
apphed  were,  besides  the  two  English  archbishops, 
and  the  Bishops  of  London  (Dr.  Temple)  and  Wor- 
cester (Dr.  Philpott),  the  Bishops  of  Manchester 
(Dr.  Eraser)  and  Liverpool  (Dr.  Eyle).  Dr.  Temple, 
it  will  be  remembered,  had  written  the  first  of  the 

*  John  xix.  15.  t  Record,  July  7,  1882. 


Essays  and  Reviews,  and  Dr.  Philpott  had  expressed 
sympathy  with  the  Colenso  party,  wishing  God- 
speed to  a  clergyman  who  was  going  out  to  join 
them.  As  for  Dr.  Fraser  and  Dr.  Eyle,  they  were 
two  of  the  Lowest  Churchmen  on  the  bench  :  and 
their  proceedings  in  the  interests  of  the  Low-Church 
party  will  be  seen  further  on. 


Polemical  Period,  continued.  Opposition  at  Oxford  to  Woodard 
Schools.  Eev.  J.  W.  Cunningham.  Opposition  to  a  Scheme  for 
Missionary  Bishops.  Low-Churchmen  hissed  at  a  Church 
Congress.  London  College  of  Divmity.  Rev.  Dr.  Marsh.  Eev. 
H.  V.  EUiott.     Eev.  Hugh  Stowell. 

We  now  return  to  our  general  narrative.  In 
November  1861  a  pubhc  meeting  was  held  at 
Oxford,  in  the  Sheldonian  Theatre,  to  promote  the 
establishment  of  cheap  public  schools  for  the  lower 
middle  class,  on  the  plan  formed  by  Canon  Woodard, 
by  which  the  distinctive  Anglican  character  of  the 
religious  teaching,  and  of  the  system  in  general, 
was  to  be  kept  up.  While  the  meeting  was  as- 
sembling, an  anonymous  paper  was  circulated 
making  these  allegations : — "  1.  Confession  is  en- 
couraged among  the  boys  at  these  schools.  Many 
influential  clergy  in  the  neighbourhood  withhold 
their  support  from  the  schools  on  this  account. 
2.  Crucifixes  are  distributed  among  the  boys  on 
leaving  these  schools."  Considering  that  the  Church 
of  England  contemplates  the  use  of  confession 
wherever  the  conscience  is  burdened  with  sin,  and 
considering  that  the  possession  of  a  crucifix  is  not 

1  72  REV.  J.  W.  CUNNINGHAM. 

a  sin  at  all,  we  should  have  thought  that  to  make 
these  alleged  facts  grounds  of  opposing  Canon 
Woodard's  scheme  was  rather  out  of  place  in 
members  of  the  Church  of  England :  it  would 
surely  have  been  enough  for  each  Protestant  parent 
to  abstain  from  contributing  to  the  establishment 
of  one  of  the  schools,  and  from  sending  his  own 
son  to  any.  The  Christian  Observer,  however, 
thought  otherwise,  and  braved  "  the  displeasure  of 
the  Sheldon  Theatre,  and  its  thousand  enthusiastic 
undergraduates  "  (fortunately  there  was  no  fear  of 
the  Theatre  or  its  undergraduates  troubling  them- 
selves about  the  Christian  Observer  at  all),  by  telling 
them  "  plainly  that  such  an  institution  "  was  "  un- 
worthy of  the  countenance  of  a  Protestant  Univer- 
sity." * 

The  same  year  (1861)  terminated  the  mortal 
•career  of  the  Eev.  John  William  Cunningham. 
Born  January  3,  1780,  of  a  pious  mother,  he  at- 
tended, while  a  boy,  the  preaching  of  Low-Church- 
men ;  of  Basil  Woodd  generally,  and  of  Eomaine 
and  John  Newton  occasionally.  He  entered  in  due 
time  at  St.  John's  College,  Cambridge,  and  became 
a  Fellow  of  that  Society.  While  at  Cambridge,  he 
used  to  hear  Mr.  Simeon,  and  sometimes  Eobert 
Hall,  the  eloquent  Anabaptist.  In  1802  he  was 
ordained  by  Bishop  North  of  Winchester  to  the 
curacy  of  Eipley  in  Surrey  ;  a  year  afterwards  he 
removed  to  the  sole  charge  of  Ockham,  in  the  same 
neighbourhood ;  then  to  the  curacy  of  Clapham, 
under  the  Eev.  John  Venn,  where  he  soon  became 
a  member  of  "  the  Clapham  Sect"  (as  Sydney  Smith 

•  Christian  Observer  for  1861,  p.  980. 


termed  it),  then  flourishing  :  he  having  even  in  his 
schooldays  made  the  aquaintance  of  those  who  were 
now  Sir  Eobert  Grant  and  Lord  Glenelg.  In  1811 
he  became  Vicar  of  Harrow,  the  presentation  to 
that  hving  having  been  previously  purchased  by 
his  family.  Nor  was  he  idle  here.  In  the  course 
of  his  fifty  years'  incumbency  the  more  distant 
hamlets  of  the  parish  were  formed  into  three  dis- 
trict-parishes, the  third  of  which  had  its  church 
ready  for  consecration  when  he  died.  The  mother- 
church  was  enlarged  and  restored ;  schools  were 
erected  for  it  and  the  daughter-parishes,  and  paro- 
chial machiner}^  of  various  kinds  formed  and  set 
a-going.  He  departed  to  his  rest  Sept.  30,  1861. 
He  had  been  Editor  of  the  Christian  Observer  from 
1850  to  1858. 

In  1862  Bishop  Wilberforce  of  Oxford  brought 
into  the  House  of  Lords  a  bill  for  the  appointment 
of  missionary  bishops.  It  was  opposed  by  the  Lord 
Chancellor  Westbury,  from  a  sense  of  duty  !  And 
with  regard  to  it  the  Christian  Observer  remarked  : 
"  This  is  not  the  first  attempt  of  the  extreme  Hio-h 
Church  part}^  to  invade  the  royal  prerogative  in 
tilings  spiritual."  * 

In  1863  was  afforded  the  first  positive  indica- 
tion, perhaps,  of  a  decrease  in  the  prestige  of  the 
Low  Church  party ;  an  indication,  however,  of  a 
kind  which  might  well  have  been  spared.  In  the 
October  of  that  year  a  Church  congress  was  held 
at  Manchester.  At  this  time  Church  congresses 
were  not  regarded  with  favour  by  Low-Churchmen 
in  general.     The  Eev.  J.   C.  Eyle,  the   writer  of 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1862,  p.  640. 


sundry  tracts,  and  known  also  as  a  determined 
maintainer  of  Low-Churcli  doctrines,  had  avowed 
liis  own  intention  of  keeping  aloof  from  one,  on 
tlie  ground  of  its  Higli-Churcli  character,  the 
congress  movement  being  supported  very  largely 
by  High-Churchmen.  And  on  the  present  occasion 
Canon  Stowell,  a  noted  Low-Church  leader,  was 
hissed,  and  sat  down  amidst  indescribable  con- 
fusion. Mr.  Bardsley  also  met  with  similar  treat- 

This  year,  however,  was  chiefly  remarkable  for 
the  opening,  in  the  month  of  September,  of  the 
London  College  of  Divinity.  It  had  been  founded 
by  the  Eev.  Alfred  Peache,  Incumbent  of  Mangots- 
field-with-Downend,  in  Gloucestershire,  and  Miss 
Peache,  at  a  cost  of  upwards  of  £70,000,  for  the 
purpose  of"  training  for  the  Ministry  of  the  Church 
of  England  suitable  candidates  who  have  not  re- 
ceived  a  university  education  :  and  also  for  afford- 
ing systematic  theological  teaching  to  graduates." 
Its  fundamental  principle  was  expressed  in  the 
followincf  extract  from  the  trust  deed  : — "The  teach- 
ing  and  government  shall  always  be  strictly  Pro- 
testant and  Evangelical,  in  conformity  with  the 
doctrines  of  the  United  Church  of  England  and 
Ireland,  as  expressed  in  the  Thirty-nine  Articles, 
as  now  by  law  established,  interpreted  according 
to  the  plain  and  natural  meaning  thereof." 

This  was  the  same  institution  which,  three  years 
later,  took  up  its  abode  in  Highbury,  in  buildings 
to  which  was  transferred  the  name  of  the  place 
where  its  work  was  now  commenced,  viz.  St.  John's 
Hall.     The  object  was,  as  has  been  seen,  to  furnish 


the  Cliurcli  with  Low-Church  ministers.  It  was 
arranged  that  the  full  course  of  study  should 
occupy  three  years,  and  that  its  students  should 
have  the  most  complete  Biblical  and  theological 
training,  according  to  the  opinions  of  the  college 
authorities,  which  their  time  and  previous  educa- 
tion would  permit  in  their  several  cases.  And,  as 
the  final  test  on  passing  out  of  the  college  pre- 
viously to  ordination,  it  was  required  that  the 
student  should  present  himself  at  the  general  pre- 
liminary examination  of  candidates  for  holy  orders, 
conducted  by  the  Board  of  University  Examiners. 
This  was  to  serve  instead  of  an  examination  for  a 
degree,  which  the  college  was  not  authorised  to 
confer.  But  in  order  to  ensure  as  far  as  possible 
that  each  student  should  both  be  and  continue  a 
Low-Churchman,  he  had,  previously  to  entrance, 
to  satisfy  the  college  examiner  not  only  as  to  his 
possessing  a  sufficient  amount  of  classical  or  other 
knowledge,  but  also  as  to  his  apparent  "  promise 
of  fitness  for  the  ministry."  * 

The  year  1864  witnessed  the  decease  of  an  emi- 
nent Low-Church  clergyman,  William  Marsh,  D.D., 
Honorary  Canon  of  Worcester,  and  Eector  of  Bed- 
dington  in  Surrey.  He  was  born  in  1775,  and  was 
third  son  of  Col.  Sir  Charles  Marsh,  who  served  in 
India  under  Lord  Clive.  "  Early  in  his  nineteenth 
year,  one  of  his  acquaintances  fell  down  dead  in 
an  assembly-room,  in  his  presence.  He  went  home 
and  passed  a  sleepless  night  of  deep  anxiety  as  to 
the  safety  of  his  own  soul  if  he  had  been  the  one 

*  London  College  of  Divinity  Calendar  for  1884. 

176  REV.    DR.    MARSH. 

taken  and  his  comjoanion  left.  Towards  morning' 
he  fell  asleep  and  dreamt,  as  was  not  nnnatural 
after  such  thoughts  and  such  an  event,  that  the 
Judgment  Day  was  come,  that  he  saw  the  Saviour, 
and  that  he  was  carried  away  from  His  presence 
into  outer  darkness.  He  awoke  in  an  agony,  and 
found  it  was  a  dream.  Then  he  thought  he  heard 
a  voice  from  heaven  cry,  'Awake,  thou  that 
sleepest,  and  arise  from  the  dead,  and  Christ  shall 
give  thee  light.'  "  *  Under  these  impressions,  "  he 
at  once  set  himself  to  seek  Christ  as  his  Saviour 
from  the  wrath  to  come.  He  be<]fan  a  dilic^ent 
study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  reading  four  chapters 
a  day  with  prayer :  and  at  the  same  time  regu- 
larly attending  the  .  .  .  ministry  of  the  Hon.  and 
Eev.  Wm.  B.  Cadogan,  at  Eeading,  until  he  found 
.  .  .joy  and  peace  in  believing.  .  .  .  Before  this 
the  army  had  been  his  destination,  and  a  commission 
had  been  given  him  in  consequence  of  his  father's 
gallant  services  in  India.  But  now  the  ministry 
of  the  Gospel  of  Christ  had  superior  attractions, 
and  he  resigned  his  commission  without  joining 
his  regiment,"  f  and  entered  in  due  time  at  St. 
Edmund's  Hall,  Oxford. 

He  was  ordained  to  the  curacy  of  St.  Lawrence, 
Eeading,  in  1798  ;  which  charge  he  served  gra- 
tuitously for  ten  years  ;  being  also  presented  in 
1801  to  the  small  livings  of  Nettlebed,  now,  it 
would  seem,  united  in  one  donative.  Later,  he  was 
presented  to  Basildon  and  Ashampstead.  Those, 
it  will  be  remembered,  were  the  days  of  pluralism. 

*  Obituary  in  Christian  Observer  for  1864,  p.  790. 
t  Ih.  p.  791. 

KEV.    DR.    MARSH.  177 

But  it  should  be  mentioned  that,  either  while 
Curate  of  St.  Lawrence's,  or  after  he  left,  he  paid 
all  the  Vicar's  debts.  In  1813  he  took  St.  James's 
Proprietary  Chapel,  Brighton,  and  remained  there 
nine  months,  that  is,  until  the  decision  of  a  point 
of  law  concerning  his  tenure  of  the  chapel  was 
given  against  him.  He  was  now  presented  by 
Mr.  Simeon  of  Cambridge  to  the  vicarage  of  St. 
Peter's,  Colchester.  And  here  let  us  cite  the  fol- 
lowing anecdote  from  Miss  Marsh's  biography  of 
him.  It  appears  that  a  clergyman  had  published 
a  pamphlet  containing  various  false  statements 
about  Mr.  Marsh,  of  which  Mr.  Marsh  had  taken 
no  notice.  "  Shortly  afterwards,  on  some  public 
occasion,  the  benefactors  of  the  County  Hospital 
were  required  to  walk  together  in  procession.  My 
father  was  one  of  them,  and  the  clergyman  who 
was  appointed  to  walk  with  him  was  the  one  who 
had  attacked  him.  My  father  had  heard  his  name, 
but  the  other  did  not  know  that  his  companion 
was  the  man  whom  he  had  been  persuaded  to 
calumniate.  He  became  so  charmed  with  him  in 
the  course  of  their  walk,  that  at  the  end  of  it  he 
said  to  a  friend  who  resided  in  the  town,  '  Tell  me 
who  was  my  delightful  companion  ?  He  seems  to 
be  the  heau  ideal  of  a  Christian  and  a  gentleman.' 
'  He  is  the  man  about  whom  you  have  written  in 
no  measured  terms,'  was  the  reply.  The  cleroy- 
man  was  hurrying  away,  when  my  father  hastened 
after  him,  took  his  hand,  and  expressed  his  cor- 
dial good  wishes  for  him.  The  other  was  deeply 
touched,  and  at  once  went  to  his  publisher  to  buy 
u.  13 

178  REV.   DR.   MARSH. 

up  the  remaining  copies  of  his  pamphlet,  that  he 
might  commit  them  to  the  flames."  * 

In  1828  or  thereabouts  he  took  the  district 
church  of  St.  Thomas's,  Birmingham,  on  the  pre- 
sentation of  his  friend  the  Eector  of  Birmingham, 
the  Eev.  Thomas  Moseley ;  who,  "  Hving,"  we  are 
told,  on  terms  of  the  closest  intimacy  with  "  Mr. 
Marsh,  bears  this  testimony,  that  a  more  heavenly- 
minded  man  he  never  knew ;  that  he  never,  to  the 
best  of  his  recollection,  spent  a  half-hour  with  him, 
or  received  a  note  from  him,  which  did  not  breathe 
of  that  Kinc^dom  on  which  his  affections  were 
supremely  set.  And  this  was  the  more  remarkable 
because  he  had  evermore  a  fund  of  playful  wit  and 
pleasantry  at  his  command,  which  made  him  very 
popular  with  all  classes.  Such  a  combination  of 
vivacity  and  spirituality  he  never  saw  in  any 
man."  f 

Those  "  were  the  times  of  the  Eeform  Bill.  Yet 
Dr.  Marsh  commanded  the  respect  of  all,  and  the 
love  of  very  many.  Upon  some  surging  meetings 
where  angry  passions  were  abroad,  he  was  ex- 
pressly called  in  to  pour  the  oil  of  his  gentleness 
and  sanctity.  But  those  who  knew  him  best  loved 
him  most.  To  his  curates  he  was  a  father.  His 
house  and  table  was  always  open  to  them.  So, 
indeed,  it  was  to  all  who  asked  it,  perhaps  even  to 
a  fault.  Both  at  Colchester  and  Birmingham  he 
was  perhaps  too  prodigal  of  his  time  and  of  his 
purse  to  some  whom  a  severer  scrutiny  would  have 

*  Life  of  the  Bev.  William  Marsh,  D.D.,  by  his  daughter, 
1867,  pp.  102,  103. 

t  Obituary  in  Christian  Observer  for  1864,  p.  793. 

REV.    H.    V.    ELLIOTT.  179 

rejected.  Every  Saturday  he  had  a  prayer-meeting 
with  his  curates  ;  and  every  month  a  clerical  meet- 
ing for  the  town  and  neighbourhood,  which  he 
made  a  great  point  of  attending,  and  into  which 
he  pre-eminently  infused  a  spirit  of  peace  and  love. 
'  He  kept  us  together,'  said  Mr.  Moseley."  * 

From  Birmingham  he  went,  in  1839,  to  Leam- 
ington, where  he  built  a  chapel  (St.  Mary's)  mainly 
at  his  own  cost,  and  took  the  incumbency  of  the 
same.  In  1851  he  resigned  it,  and  went  to  live 
with  his  son-in-law,  the  Eev.  F.  S.  C.  Chalmers, 
Eector  of  Beckenham,  Kent;  till,  in  1860,  he  ac- 
cepted the  rectory  of  Beddington,  near  Croydon, 
in  Surrey,  where  he  departed  to  his  rest  August 
25,  1864. 

Two  more  Low-Church  leaders  followed  Dr. 
Marsh  in  the  year  following  :  the  Eev.  Henry  Venn 
Elliott  and  the  Eev.  Hugh  Stowell.  The  Eev. 
Henry  Venn  Elliott  was  born  on  the  17  th  of 
January,  1792.  His  mother  was  Eling,  a  daughter 
of  Henry  Venn  the  elder,  author  of  The  Complete 
Duty  of  Man.  Manliness  was  a  characteristic 
•of  his  youth.  Twice  he  stopped  men  fighting  in 
the  street,  and  on  one  of  these  occasions  he  went 
between  the  contending  parties  and  said,  "  If 
you  want  to  fight,  fight  me,"  and  then  rebuked 
the  bystanders  for  encouraging  the  fight.  In 
1810  he  went  up  to  Trinity  College,  Cambridge ; 
and  while  still  an  undergraduate  he  bore  a  part 
in  the  formation  in  the  University  of  an  auxiliary 
branch  to  the  British  and  Foreign  Bible  Society. 
He   took   his    degree  in   January    1814 ;    and   in 

*  Obituary  in  Christian  Observer  for  1864,  p.  793. 


180  REV.   H.   V.    ELLIOTT. 

October  1816  was  elected  Fellow  of  his  college. 
On  Sunday,  the  2nd  of  November,  1823,  he  was 
ordained  deacon  by  Bishop  Sparks  of  Ely,  to  the 
curacy  of  Ampton,  near  Bury  St.  Edmunds,  and 
received  priest's  orders  at  Norwich  on  Trinity 
Sunday,  June  13,  1824,  from  Bishop  Bathurst. 
He  left  Ampton  in  January  1827  for  the  incumbency 
of  St.  Mary's  Proprietary  Chapel,  Brighton ;  this 
having  been  purchased  for  him  by  his  father.  He 
retained  this  charge  until  his  decease,  and  showed 
himself  an  earnest  supporter,  both  in  public  and 
in  private,  of  the  London  Society  for  Promoting 
Christianity  among  the  Jews,  of  a  local  Scripture 
Eeaders'  Society,  and,  above  all,  of  the  "  Church 
Missionary  Society."  He  went  in,  too,  for  keeping 
the  Crystal  Palace  closed  on  Sundays.  But  his 
chief  work  was  the  establishment  of  St.  Mary's 
Hall — an  institution  for  educating  the  daughters 
of  clergymen  with  narrow  incomes.  It  was  opened 
in  1836.  His  theology  appears  to  have  been 
somewhat  better  than  that  of  his  fellow  Low- 
Churchmen  in  general ;  for  a  paper  on  Confession 
and  Absolution,  inserted  by  his  biographer  into 
his  life,  indicates  that  he  held,  in  essence,  the  doc- 
trine of  ministerial  forgiveness,  though  not  intel- 
ligently, or  with  consciousness  (so  far  as  appears) 
of  the  grounds  on  which  that  doctrine  rests.  But 
he  understood  "  This  is  My  Body "  as  meaning 
"  This  represents  My  Body."  He  departed  to  his 
rest  on  the  21st  of  January,  1865. 

The  Eev.  Hugh  Stowell  was  born  on  the  3rd  of 
December,  1799,  at  Douglas,  in  the  Isle  of  Man. 
His  father,  the  Kev.  Hugh  Stowell,  was  then  in- 

REV.    HUGH   STOWELL.  181 

cumbent  of  a  small  chapel-of-ease,  but  afterwards 
became  Vicar  of  Kirk  Lonan,  and  latterly  Eector  of 
Ballaugh.  He  was  "  eminent  for  his  fervent  piety 
and  simple  eloquence,  nor  less  distinguished  for 
the  primitive  simplicity  of  his  life,  the  sweetness  of 
his  disposition,  and  the  refinement  and  courtesy  of 
his  manners  ;  "  and  his  sermons,  two  volumes  of 
which  were  published  by  his  son,  the  subject  of 
the  present  notice,  "  show,"  says  the  reviewer  in 
the  Christian  Observer,  "  that  he  preached  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Gospel  with  fidelity  and  zeal."  When 
it  is  added  that  two  of  his  tracts,  "  Willian  Kelly,  or 
the  Happy  Christian,'''  and  "  The  Pious  Manx  Pea- 
sant, or  the  Life  of  William  Curphey,  are  upon  the 
Eeligious  Tract  Society's  list,  we  may  venture  to 
infer  that  the  distinctive  Catholic  doctrines  of  the 
Anglican  Communion  formed  no  distinctive  part 
of  the  religious  teaching  given  by  the  Eev.  Hugh 
Stowell,  senior. 

Young  Hugh  Stowell  went  from  his  studies 
under  his  father's  roof  to  be  prepared  for  the  uni- 
versity by  the  Eev.  John  Cawood,  Vicar  of  Bewd- 
ley,  in  Worcestershire,  from  whom  he  went  to  St. 
Edmund's  Hall,  Oxford,  of  which  the  Eev.  John 
Hill,  afterwards  Vice-Principal,  was  then  tutor.  He 
had  good  abilities,  and  does  not  seem  to  have  been 
idle ;  but  he  studied  according  to  his  own  plan, 
and  did  not  distinguish  himself.  He  took  his  B.A. 
degree  in  1822,  and  was  ordained  in  1823  to  the 
curacy  of  Shepscombe,  a  chapelry  in  the  parish  of 
Painswick,  near  Stroud,  in  Gloucestershire.  His 
diocesan  was  Dr.  Eyder,  afterwards  Bishop  of 
Lichfield.     The  following  year  he  took  the  curacy 

182  REV.    HUGH    STOWELL. 

of  Trinity  Church,  Huddersfield ;  and  afterwards 
the  sole  charge  of  St.  Stephen's,  Salford,  Man- 
chester. "  At  that  time,"  we  are  told,  "  Evangelical 
principles  were  held  by  but  a  small  minority  of 
the  clergy  in  the  vast  parish  of  Manchester,  of 
which  Salford  was  but  a  chapelry.  .  .  .  Excellent 
men  they  were,  inferior  to  none  of  their  suc- 
cessors " — thus  the  reviewer  in  the  Christian  Ob- 
server writes.  "  Truly  they  bore  the  burthen  and 
heat  of  the  day :  they  laboured,  and  other  men 
have  entered  into  their  labours.  But  they  were 
not  gifted  with  that  rhetorical  power,  that  rare  gift 
of  commanding  rather  than  soliciting  the  rapt  at- 
tention of  vast  crowds,  which  was  granted  to  Mr. 
Stowell.  Political  dissent  was  violent,  and  Church 
laymen  were  apathetic.  A  Wesley  an  lay  gentle- 
man, long  resident  in  Manchester,  assured  us, 
some  years  before  Mr.  Stowell's  decease,  that  he 
believed  that  the  Church  of  England  owed  its  very 
existence  in  Manchester  to  the  exertions  of  Hugh 
Stowell.  We  did  not  agree  with  him  at  the  time, 
nor  do  we  now  ;  and  we  relate  the  conversation 
just  as  it  occurred,  that  the  reader  may  in  some 
measure  appreciate  the  effect  which  really  followed 
Mr.  Stowell's  exertions. 

"  He  certainly  possessed  one  advantage  over 
most  of  his  friends :  he  was  an  enthusiast,  almost 
an  optimist,  in  his  views  of  the  Church  of  England. 
He  could  see  no  infirmities,  he  could  allow  of  no 
faults  in  her,  except  such  as  arose  from  the  want 
of  fidelity  in  those  to  whom  her  interests  were  en- 
trusted ;  for  which  they,  and  not  the  Church,  were 
responsible :  nor  in  the  Prayer-book,  except  that 


a  few  of  its  terms  were  obsolete,  and  thus  afforded 
a  handle  to  men  who  did  not  really  understand  its 

The  popularity  in  which  he  was  held  for  his 
pulpit  eloquence,  and  the  difficulties  in  the  way  of 
building  a  new  church  at  that  time,  and  of  getting 
him  appointed  to  the  incumbency  of  one,  led  to 
the  "  Trustees  Church-Building  Act,"  under  which 
Christ  Church,  Salford,  was  consecrated  in  Novem- 
ber 1831  by  Bishop  Sumner,  afterwards  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  in  whose  diocese,  that  of  Chester, 
Manchester  was  then  included.  Of  this  church 
Mr.  Stowell  became  the  first  incumbent,  and  re- 
mained so  as  long  as  he  lived.  "  For  more  than 
a  quarter  of  a  century  he  was  the  president  of  the 
Manchester  and  Salford  Operative  Protestant  Asso- 
ciation. For  a  still  longer  period  he  was  chairman 
of  a  large  Clerical  Association."  "  The  depth  of 
affectionate  respect  which  was  felt  for  Mr.  Stowell 
in  Manchester  was  shown  by  a  very  remarkable 
occurrence.  A  false  report  one  day  went  abroad 
that  he  had  died  suddenly  in  the  street.  The  scene 
on  the  Exchange  and  throughout  the  city  was  most 
affecting.  His  friends  were  besieged  with  inquiries, 
which  they  were  unprepared  to  answer.  Meanwhile, 
the  unconscious  subject  of  this  painful  excitement, 
having  gone  that  morning  to  breakfast  with  the 
Bishop,  himself  drove  through  the  centre  of  Man- 
chester and  Salford  in  an  open  conveyance,  much 
perplexed  by  the  extraordinary  manner  in  which 
people  regarded  him,  several  taking  off  their  hats 
and  waving  them  over  their  heads  ;  until,  observing 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1868,  pp.  139,  140 

184  REV.    HUGH   STOWELL. 

one  poor  woman  burst  into  tears,  lie  drew  up  and 
inquired  what  was  the  matter  with  her,  upon  which 
she  informed  him.  He  hurried  home,  where,  hap- 
pily, he  learned  that  the  premature  tidings  had 
not  yet  disturbed  the  quiet  of  his  family."* 

Mr.  Stowell  was  one  of  the  earliest,  strongest, 
and  most  persevering  of  the  opponents  to  the 
Tractarian  movement.  To  his  sermons  entitled 
Tractarianism  tested  by  Holy  Scrijiture  and  the 
Church  of  England  we  have  already  referred.  In 
one  passage  of  them  he  mentions  "  Luther  and 
Calvin  and  Zuinc^le  "  along  with  "  the  noble  host  of 
reformers  on  the  Continent  "  as  having  "  raised  the 
fallen  Church."  f  In  his  later  days  he  received 
the  unsubstantial  dignity  of  Honorary  Canon  of 
C'hester.  He  departed  to  his  rest  on  the  8th  of 
October,  1865. 


Polemical  Period,  continued.  Improvements  in  Chiirch  Matters 
discussed  or  recommended  by  Low-Churchmen.  Some  Improve- 
ments deprecated.     Abuses  allowed. 

We  have  now  arrived,  in  the  course  of  these 
Annals,  at  the  end  of  that  period  which  it  seemed 
proper  to  designate  as  the  Polemical  Period.  And 
it  may  not  be  amiss  to  take  here  a  brief  review  of 
the  results  of  Low-Church  work  as  they  appeared 
at  the  time  now^  to  be  spoken  of.  We  will  note 
some  points  in  which  Low-Church  influence  had 
been  exerted  for  good,  and  then  some  in  which  it 

*  Christian  Observer  for  18G8,  p.  145. 
t   Tractarianism  Tested,  vol.  i.  p.  289. 


had  either  been  exerted  for  harm  or  else  not  been 
exerted  at  aU. 

Among  the  measures  of  improvement  which 
had  been  discussed  by  Low-Church  people  and 
not  summarily  dismissed  may  be  mentioned  the 
presence  of  non-communicants  at  celebrations  of 
the  Holy  Eucharist.*  Others  had  been  advocated, 
and  came  to  be  adopted  by  Low-Church  people 
generally.  Such  was  the  practice  of  preachers 
with  reference  to  the  recitation  of  Mattins  or  Even- 
song :  it  appears  to  have  been  common  for  preachers, 
Low-Churchmen  among  the  rest,  to  take  no  part 
in  those  offices,  even  as  ordinary  worshippers,  but 
to  remain  in  the  vestry  until,  the  prayers  being 
ended,  it  was  time  to  proceed  to  the  pulpit.  Against 
this  practice  a  writer  in  the  Christian  Observer  set 
himself,f  and  it  must  soon  have  come  to  an  end. 
The  offering  of,  or  joining  in,  the  daily  service  as 
enjoined  by  the  Prayer-book  was  more  than  once 
recommended  in  the  same  periodical ;  "^  and  Daniel 
Wilson  (afterwards  Bishop  of  Calcutta)  acted  upon 
the  principle  so  far  as  to  start  and  keep  up  in  St. 
Mary's,  Islington,  morning  prayers  on  Wednesdays, 
Fridays,  and  saints'  days  ;  besides  instituting  a  ser- 
vice on  the  Sundays  and  greater  holy-days  over 
and  above  what  he  found  when  he  came  to  the 
parish.  The  observance  of  Ember-seasons  also 
with  special  prayer  was  urged. (^  Conformity,  too, 
to  some  rubrics  the  observance  whereof  did  not 

*   Christian  Observer,  1836,  pp.  487,  544,  599. 

t  Ih.  1839,  p.  19. 

X  Ih.  for  1833,  pp.  585,  787  ;  1834,  p.  79  ;  1842,  p.  148,  &c. 

§  Ih.  1837,  p.  316. 


contravene  any  recognised  Low-Church  principle 
— as,  for  instance,  those  concerning  the  manner 
of  announcing  or  concluding  a  lesson,  epistle,  or 
gospel — this  also  on  the  recommendation  of  the 
Christian  Observer*  or  that  of  such  men  as  the  late 
Professor  Scholefield,f  found  speedy  acceptance, 
though  not  everywhere. 

As  to  the  modes  of  conducting  Divine  Service, 
we  find  a  correspondent  of  the  Christiaii  Observer 
tacitly  taking  for  granted  that  intoning  was  desir- 
able in  some  cases  at  the  least,J  and  the  Editor 
expressing,  as  late  as  1842,  a  hope  that  Bishop 
Wilson  meant  to  estabHsh  a  daily  choral  service  in 
his  Cathedral  at  Calcutta.  §  And  even  the  admirers 
of  the  Gregorian  chants  had  their  advocate  in  the  ' 
same  Low-Church  periodical.  ||  A  division  of  the 
services,  so  as  to  make  the  function  on  a  Sunday 
morning  less  wearisome  to  those  engaged  in  it,  was 
recommended  by  a  correspondent  as  far  back  as 
1819  ;  the  division  proposed  being,  first  Mattins, 
secondly.  Litany  and  "  Communion  Service  "  (mean- 
ing, apparently,  that  portion  of  the  Eucharistic 
Office  which  was  vulgarly  designated  as  "  the  Table 
Prayers  "),  and  thirdly,  Evensong. •[[  We  have  met 
with  a  lament,  in  1842,  of  the  neglect  of  pubHc 

The  Low-Church  party  owed  much  of  its  follow- 
ing to  the  institutions  called  proprietary  chapels. 

*  Christian  Observer,  1837.     I  have  lost  the  reference  in  detail. 

t  In  a  sermon  heard  by  the  present  writer. 

X  Christian  Observer,  1826,  p.  19. 

§  lb.  1842,  p.  319.  II  lb.  1844,  pp.  650,  652. 

H  lb.  1819,  p.  638.  **  lb.  1842,  pp.  76,  77. 


A  Low-Church  preacher  for  whom  there  was  no 
immediate  prospect — perhaps  no  prospect  at  all — 
of  the  incumbency  of  a  large  church  would  rent 
an  unconsecrated  building  which  had  been  fitted 
up  with  pulpit,  reading-desk,  clerk's  desk,  pews, 
organ,  and  (last  in  estimation)  altar,  and  officiate 
in  it  with  the  sanction  of  the  incumbent  of  the 
parish,  and  under  licence  from  the  bishop,  for  the 
spiritual  benefit  or  delectation  of  such  persons  as 
chose  to  rent  sittings.  Or  the  chapel  might  be 
rented  by  a  body  of  trustees,  or  by  a  single  lay  per- 
son, who  then  appointed  the  preacher,  and  perhaps 
a  reader  also  (as  the  second  clergyman  was  called), 
wdio  was  responsible  for  the  prayers  alone.  The 
mischief  resulting  from  this  state  of  things,  or 
rather  some  of  the  mischief,  was  thus  pointed  out 
in  1829  by  a  correspondent  of  the  CliristAan  Ob- 
server : — "  The  capellan  system  has  done  much 
injury  to  the  ministerial  character  of  the  clergy, 
deprived  the  people  of  pastoral  care,  and  dissevered 
in  the  minds  of  both  what  our  Church  has  so  scrip- 
turally  joined,  '  the  Word '  and  '  the  Sacraments.' 
The  new  system  of  district  churches  is  a  hopeful 
step  in  the  return  to  the  ancient  plan  of  parochial 
discipline."  * 

If  we  turn  our  thousfhts  to  larger  matters  than 
the  interests  of  a  single  cono-regation,  we  find  Low  - 
Churchmen  expressing  their  sense  of  the  anomaly 
of  an  episcopal  church  without  a  bishop  in  it ;  f 
and  their  approval  of  the  appointment  of  bishops 
to  superintend  ecclesiastical  affairs  in  the  Colonies. ;|l 

*  Christian  Observer,  1829,  p.  174. 
t  Ih.  1841,  p.  380.  X  lb.  1842,  Preface,  p.  iv. 

188  CHANGE   OF   FRONT. 

It  is  curious  to  read  the  record  of  these  few  in- 
stances of  an  appreciation  of  Cathohc  truth  and 
practice  as  inculcated  by  the  Church  of  England, 
and  to  remark  at  the  same  time  how,  when  Low- 
Church  principles  were  brought  out  by  a  rival 
school  of  theology  and  religion,  many  of  the  things 
thus  recommended  by  individual  Low-Churchmen 
here  and  there  were  subsequently  denounced  by 
Low-Churchmen  more  or  less  generally  as  evil. 
Thus  one  correspondent  of  the  Christian  Observer 
in  1842  questions  whether  the  practice  of  daily 
prayers  in  church  would  conduce  to  edification.* 
Archbishop  Sumner  wished  that  Tractarians  had 
continued  the  old  practice  of  ignoring  rubrics. f 
The  same  prelate  deprecated  choral  services  in 
parish  churches.J  The  expression  "  anti-pew 
mania "  occurs  more  than  once  in  the  Christian 
Observer.^  A  correspondent  of  that  periodical 
raised  a  protest  not  only  against  the  name  but 
against  the  architecture  of  All  Souls,  Marylebone.  || 
Another  (whose  letter  the  Editor  printed  in  large 
type)  deprecated  the  use  of  special  vessels  in 
private  communions,  and  declared :  "  Even  now 
there  are  many  persons  who  would  not  commu- 
nicate if  a  clergyman  came  to  their  house  thus 
equipped,  lest  they  should  seem  to  countenance 
Popish  superstition."  ^  Another  objected  to  the 
opening  of  churches  for  private  devotion ;  **  as  if 
a  church  were  peculiarly  unfit  for  such  a  purpose, 

•  Christian  Ohserver,  1842,  p.  77. 
t  Ih.  1849,  p.  141.  X  Ih.  1849,  p.  141. 

§  Ih.  1844.  II  lb.  1825,  p.  748. 

IT  lb.  1838,  p.  688.  **  lb.  1844,  p.  610. 


and  so  unfit  as  to  be  exempted  from  the  applica- 
tion of  St.   Paul's  words,  "  I  will  that  men  pray 
everywhere."  *      One  of  the  canons  of  the  Church 
of  England  f  enacts  that  "  when  in  time  of  Divine 
Service   the  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  mentioned,  due 
and  lowly  reverence  shall  be  done  by  all  persons 
present."     This,  however,  save  in  the  Creed,  was 
deprecated,^  nor  do  we  know  of  its  havino-  been 
duly  observed  by  any  Low-Churchmen  except  one, 
the  rector  of  a  small  parish  in  Wiltshire.     Evening 
communion   was  recommended  in  1842  ;  6    after- 
noon communion   had  already  been  common   in 
Wales,  II  and  the  profane  practice  became  in  time 
almost  characteristic  of  the  Low-Church  party  in 
towns  ;  adopted,  as  we  beheve,  for  the  express  pur- 
pose of  encouraging  irreverence  to  the  Sacrament 
— that  is,  of  preventing  people  from  being  more 
reverent  with  regard  to  it  than  Low-Church  teachers 
chose.      When  there  was  a  movement  arising  for 
the  increase  of  the  episcopate,  a  declaration  which 
was  got  up  in  favour  thereof  was  signed  by  a  pre- 
ponderance of  High-Churchmen,  a  sprinklino-   of 
moderate  men,  and  only  a  few  Low-Churchmen.^ 
The  line  taken  by  the  Christian  Observer  was  that 
the  scheme  would  revolutionise  the  English  Church 
and  that  the  introduction  of  "  gig  bishops  "  (as  a 
certain  noble  lord  had  termed  them)  would  "  prove 
fatal  to  prelatic  episcopacy  "  in  five  years.**     And 
five  years  later,  the  erection  and  endowment  of 

*  1  Tim.  ii.  8.  t  Canon  xviii. 

X  Christian  Observer,  1843,  p.  527. 
§  lb.  1842,  p.  600.  Ii  lb.  1843,  p.  24. 

H  lb.  1860,  p.  258.  **  lb.  pp.  259-263. 


new  bishoprics  was  opposed  on  the  ground  that 
funds  were  thus  diverted  from  the  endowment  of 
livings  and  the  maintenance  of  more  clergy.* 

Some  manifest  abuses,  moreover,  remained  either 
unnoticed,  or  at  all  events  unattacked  by  Low- 
Churchmen.  Thus  Legh  Eichmond  records,  without 
a  word  of  disapprobation,  how  on  one  occasion, 
when  he  had  been  preaching  for  the  London 
Society  for  Promoting  Christianity  amongst  the 
Jews,  the  offerings  were  collected  from  pew  to  pew 
by  ladies  supported  by  gentlemen. f  We  ourselves 
once  heard,  in  another  quarter,  of  the  same  thing 
being  done ;  and  we  heard  of  two  coins  being  put 
into  the  plate  by  one  of  the  congregation,  who  said 
aloud  at  the  same  time,  "  Those  are  for  your  two 
beautiful  eyes." 

As  to  abuses  connected  with  funeral  sermons, 
it  may  be  mentioned  that  when  the  Eev.  Josiah 
Pratt  had  departed  to  his  rest,  "  Mr.  Bickersteth 
w^as,"  we  are  told,  invited  by  the  family  to  preach 
one  of  the  "  funeral  sermons  "  for  him.  We  should 
have  thought  that  with  the  duty  of  arranging 
Christian  teaching  for  the  congregation  assembling 
in  a  place  of  public  worship  the  family  of  the 
deceased  had  nothing  whatever  to  do.  For  aught, 
however,  that  appears  in  Mr.  Bickersteth's  bio- 
graphy, Mr.  Bickersteth  himself  did  not  see  any- 
thing improper  in  the  matter ;  and  his  biographer, 
Mr.  Birks,  recorded  it  without  appearing  to  see 
that  there  was  any  need  of  an  explanation.  J 

♦  Christian  Observer,  1865,  p.  399. 

f.  Memoir  of  the  Rev.  Legh  Richmond,  p.  156. 

\  Birks's  Memoir  of  the  Rev.  E.  Bickersteth,  vol.  ii.  p.  282. 


The  unrubrical  innovation  of  repeating  the  Gene- 
ral Thanksgiving  along  with  the  officiating  minister 
appears  to  have  come  into  vogue  about  the  year 
1864.  The  object  of  it  was  to  alter  the  meaning 
•of  words,  and  to  make  ground  for  the  assertion 
that  "  general "  meant  "  to  be  generally  repeated 
aloud,"  and  hence  to  avoid  the  implied  contrast 
between  two  things  one  of  which  it  was  convenient 
to  forget,  viz.  a  general  confession  of  sins  and  a 
special  confession  of  sins. 

The  marriage  of  a  Christian  to  a  person  who  has 
never  been  baptized  is  clearly  not  what  St.  Paul 
terms  a  marriage  "  in  the  Lord."  A  vicar,  on 
being  asked  to  solemnise  such  a  marriage,  refused. 
The  opinion  of  a  lawyer  in  Doctors'  Commons  was 
asked,  and  given,  to  the  effect  that  the  vicar  could 
be  compelled  to  solemnise  it.  This  M^as  sent  to 
the  Editor  of  the  Christian  Observer  in  order  that 
the  matter  might  be  "  clearly  understood,"  and  the 
Editor  inserted  it  without  a  single  word  expressive 
of  concern  at  the  fact  that  such  an  abuse,  such 
a  profanation  of  a  holy  Christian  rite,  should  be 

So  little  had  the  Low-Church  party  done  for 
that  Church  in  general  whereof  they  were  mem- 
bers in  that  period  of  time  the  narrative  of  which 
we  now  close.  And  in  the  next  portion  of  our 
Annals  we  shall  have  only  too  much  occasion  to 
note  how  in  the  succeeding  period  the  only  j)rogress 
which  they  made  was  from  bad  to  worse.  For  the 
present  it  may  be  w^ell  to  note  a  few  instances  of 
remarkable  ignorance  in  theology,  as  manifested 

*  Christian  Observer,  1821. 


by  Low-Cliurch  people.  Thus  the  remark  was 
made  in  the  Christian  Observer  that  Eituahsm  can- 
not affect  the  soul :  *  as  if  Eitualism  were  anything 
else  than  a  system  of  acts  done  from  the  soul  (or 
rather  from  the  spirit)  towards  God.  "  The  Holy 
Ghost,  the  Author  and  Giver  of  life  "  is  an  expres- 
sion occurring  in  the  same  periodical.f  Evidently 
the  writer  did  not  know  the  Mcene  Creed  in  the 
original,  or  how  to  punctuate  a  translation  of  it. 
In  another  place  the  "  Hagiographa  "  were  spoken 
of  as  consisting  of  the  Psalms,  the  Proverbs,  the 
Song  of  Songs,  and  Ecclesiastes,  without  mention 
being  made  of  any  other  books.  J  The  "  A]3ostolic 
Fathers  "  were  spoken  of  as  "  very  poor  authorities 
on  matters  of  doctrine."  ^  A  clergyman,  too,  of 
our  own  acquaintance,  to  whom  had  been  awarded 
by  his  university  a  prize  for  an  essay  on  some 
subject  concerning  Christian  Missions,  and  who 
now  occupies  a  very  important  post  in  the  Church, 
and  was  once  in  communication  with  some  agents 
of  the  "  Church  Missionary  Society "  about  some 
educational  establishment  for  the  presidency 
whereof  he  had  been  advised  to  apply,  had  it 
alleged  by  them  as  an  objection  against  him  that 
in  his  essay  he  had  shown  too  wide  a  circle  of 
reading,  and  not  confined  his  references  to  Low- 
Church  works !  This  we  had  from  the  clergyman's 
own  lips. 

*   Christian  Observer,  1867,  p.  137.  t  lb.  1862,  p.  301. 

X  lb.  p.  371,  note.  §  lb.  p.  444. 



The  Immoral  Period.     Decline  of  the  Low -Church  Party  in 
Spirituality,  Moral  Tone,  and  Intellectual  Power. 

By  the  title  prefixed  to  this  chapter  we  designate 
that  period  in  the  history  of  the  Low-Church  party 
the  events  of  which  we  are  now  to  relate.  Our 
reasons  for  so  desimatins^  it  will  be  manifest  as 
we  proceed  in  our  narrative ;  and  if  dishonesty 
of  profession,  the  bearing  of  false  witness,  vindic- 
tive spite,  profaneness  and  sacrilege,  and  wanton 
and  cruel  slander  of  the  innocent  and  unofiending, 
be  deemed  sufficient  cause  for  designating  any  set 
of  proceedings  as  immoral,  our  reasons  for  speaking 
now  of  the  immoral  period  in  the  history  of  the 
Low-Church  party  will  be  only  too  fully  justified. 

A  marked  decline  had  taken  place  in  the  spiritual 
character  of  the  party,  and  there  was  also  a  per- 
ceptible diminution  of  its  intellectual  power.  In 
1867  Mr.  Eyle  (afterwards  Bishop)  spoke  of  the 
"  dry  rot  "  as  being  among  Low-Churchmen.  As 
far  back  as  1843  an  observer  had  remarked  that 
Low-Churchmen,  as  a  party,  were  powerless  in  the 
University  of  Oxford,  and  could  make  but  little 
demonstration  of  active  resistance  to  Tractarian- 
ism.*  And  if  such  was  the  state  of  the  party  at 
one  of  the  chief  centres  of  intellectual  life  in 
England,  we  may  be  very  sure  that  intellectual  and 
spiritual  feebleness  must  have  been  a  characteristic 

*  Letters  from  Oxford,  hy  "  Ignotus,"  cited  in  the  Christian 
Observer  for  1843,  p.  497. 

II.  14 


of  the  party  throughout  the  country.     In  short, 
the  party  which  called  itself  Evangelical  was  now 
the  fag-end  of  that  party  which  had  called  itself 
Evangelical  some    sixty  or  seventy  years  before. 
Ignorance  of  theology,*  and  narrowness  of  mind 
shown  in  the  use  of  what  theological  truth  it  still 
had,  had  come    to  be   among  its  characteristics. 
As  to  piety  and  spirituality,  a  contributor  to  the 
Christian   Observer   for   1859    spoke   about    "the 
expiring   embers   of  the  spiritual  revival  of  the 
last  century ; "  f  and  a  writer  in  the  same  maga- 
zine for  1866  furnished  to  it  three  articles  on  "  the 
Church  in  a  Laodicean  state,"  and   with   special 
reference   to   the   Low-Church   party.      And   the 
Editor  asked,  with  reference  to  the  hard  things 
said  in  the  first  of  these  articles,  "  Can  we  dare  to 
say  they  are  undeserved  ?  "     In  a  later  article  the 
writer  said :  "  My  saddened  view  of  the  state  of 
the  Church   is  drawn   from    three   or   four   well- 
known  facts.     There  never  was  a  time,  since  the 
days  of  Wliitfield   and   Romaine,    when   wealthy 
professors,  worldly  evangelicals,  were  so  common, 
so  numerous,  yet  how  rare  is  it  to  hear  a  bold  and 
faithful  protest  against  worldliness  and  the  love  of 
riches  from  the  pulpit !     There  never  was  a  time 

*  A  remarkable  instance,  showing  how  little  Mr.  Bridges,  pious 
and  devoted  clergyman  as  he  was,  knew  about  the  nature  of  the 
very  dispensation  under  which  he  was  living,  may  be  seen  in  his 
remarks  about  the  lot.  In  his  Exposition  of  the  Booh  of  Proverbs, 
on  Proverbs  xvi.  33,  we  do  indeed  read,  "  Admitting  it  to  be  a 
Scriptural  ordinance,  its  expediency  under  our  more  full  light  is 
more  than  doubtful ;  "  but  on  chapter  xviii.  18  he  wrote  :  "  There 
seems  ...  no  Scriptiu-al  prohibition  to  the  use  of  this  ordinance, 
provided  it  be  exercised  in  a  reverential  dependence  upon  God  [!], 
and  not  profaned  for  common  purposes  or  worldly  ends." 

+  Christian  Observer  for  1859,  p.  45. 


when  so  many  young  men  attended  church  on  the 
Sunday,  and  broke  the  seventh  and  other  com- 
mandments on  the  Monday ;  yet  what  preacher 
ever  dares  to  speak  plainly  of  the  breach  of  that 
commandment  from  the  pulpit  ?  There  never  was 
a  time  when  so  many  regular  church-goers  pro- 
fessed to  admire  and  believe  the  Gospel,  and  yet 
admitted  that  their  hearts  were  unaffected  by  it ; 
yet  when  are  such  persons  earnestly  dealt  with 
from  the  pulpit  ?  We  read  of  a  preacher  of  old 
who,  when  he  found  his  congregation  listless  and 
unconcerned,  sat  down  and  burst  into  tears. 
Eichard  Cecil,  under  like  circumstances,  resolved 
"  I  will  be  heard !  "  and  called  out  from  the  pulpit, 
"  Only  yesterday  a  poor  man  was  hanged  at 
Tyburn !  "  But  nowadays,  even  good  and  tho- 
roughly enlightened  men  get  up  in  the  pulpit  and 
explain  a  parable  or  a  promise,  see  their  people 
calmly  self-satisfied  at  the  beginning  and  at  the 
end  of  their  sermon,  close  their  book  without  even 
a  hope  that  one  soul  has  been  awakened  by  what 
they  have  said,  and  yet  go  quietly  home  to  dinner, 
as  if  all  was  right,  and  as  it  should  be."  *  The 
same  writer,  citing  from  a  speech  made  by  an 
earnest  friend  of  the  "  Church  Missionary  Society," 
said :  "  A  great  change  has  lately  come  upon  us. 
During  the  last  two  years,  not  more  than  one 
candidate  for  missionary  work  has  offered  from 
both  Universities.  In  the  course  of  the  last  half- 
year  not  one  person  has  offered  from  any 
quarter."  f 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1866,  pp.  209,  210. 
t  lb.  p.  211. 



We  have  noticed  the  decHne  in  spirituahty  our- 
selves. We  once  described  to  some  Low-Church 
people  certain  proceedings  at  which  we  had  been 
present,  and  at  which  a  proposal  had  been  made 
for  promoting  the  cause  of  Church  missions,  but 
had  utterly  broken  down.  The  reply  was  that 
our  narrative  had  caused  much  amusement.  On 
another  occasion,  in  our  narrating  in  the  same 
company  how  M.  Vianney,  the  holy  Cure  of  Ars, 
had  said  with  tears,  when  ordered  by  his  Diocesan 
to  diminish  his  austerities  and  take  meat  at  least 
once  a  day,  "  What  should  a  sinner  like  me  do 
with  meat  ? "  the  account  was  received  with  a 
shout  of  laughter.  And  yet  we  have  no  reason 
to  think  that  those  Low-Church  people  were  worse 
in  regard  of  spiritual  religion  than  Low-Church 
people  in  general. 

With  Christian  spirituality  Christian  charity  is 
essentially  connected,  and  the  charitable  way  in 
which  Low-Church  writers  contemplated  the  me- 
mory of  such  men  as  St.  Chrysostom  or  St.  Augus- 
tine of  Canterbury  is  illustrated  by  the  author 
of  a  review,  who  speaks  of  those  eminent  saints 
as  having  used  outside  show  and  splendour  merely 
to  gain  adherents  or  to  carry  a  point  in  politics ;  not 
to  convert  the  heart  or  to  win  souls  for  heaven.* 

With  this  decline  in  spirituality  there  was,  as 
the  reader  will  naturally  infer  for  himself,  a  decline 
in  common  moral  tone.  Li  the  year  1839  the  Rev. 
Edward  Bickersteth  had  preached  a  sermon  in 
St.  John's  Chapel,  Bedford  Eow,  on  behalf  of  the 

*  Review  of  The  Church  and  the  World,  in  ChristianOhserver 
for  186G,  p.  647. 


London  City  Mission,  a  society  which  the  Bishop 
of  London,  in  consequence  of  its  principles,  had 
forbidden  the  clergy  of  his  diocese  to  advocate 
from  their  pulpits.  If  ever  there  was  a  case  of 
self-willed  disobedience  to  authority— if  ever  there 
was  a  case  of  violating  the  ordination  vow  of 
obedience  to  the  godly  admonitions,  and  submis- 
sion to  the  godly  judgments,  of  the  Ordinary  and 
other  chief  ministers — here  was  surely  one  ;  and 
yet,  writing  in  1851,  Mr.  Bickersteth's  biographer, 
the  Eev.  T.  E.  Birks,  thus  introduces  his  account 
of  the  matter  :  "  The  sermon  for  the  City  Mission 
was  undertaken  under  circumstances  which  in- 
volved some  self-denial  and  moral  courage."  * 
Again,  when  Stanley,  the  African  explorer,  pub- 
lished his  account  of  the  wholesale  murders  per- 
petrated by  himself  on  poor  savages,  whose  sole 
offence  had  been  the  stealing  of  a  few  oars  or 
other  chattels,  on  account  whereof,  when  that  self- 
conceited  villain  was  to  give  an  address  before  the 
Eoyal  Geographical  Society,  the  President  and 
sundry  members  withdrew  rather  than  counte- 
nance a  murderer  in  his  wickedness,  the  Evange- 
lical Record  had  no  word  of  condemnation  for  the 
bloody  transactions,  but  rather  congratulated  its 
readers  on  the  prospects  which  Stanley  had  opened 
of  the  extension  of  Christianity.  Nor  did  Low- 
Churchmen  care  what  they  said  to  the  discredit  of 
their  theological  opponents.  The  Rock  newspaper 
stated  one  day  that  a  priest,  an  associate  of  the 
Confraternity  of  the  Blessed  Sacrament,  had  been 

*  Memoir,  2nd  edition,  vol.  ii.  p.  143.      The  first  edition  was 
published  in  1851. 

198  DECLINE    IN    MORAL    TONE. 

sentenced  to  seven  years'  transportation  for  forg- 
ing bank-cheques,  the  facts  being  that  the  priest 
named  had  died  some  years  before,  and  that  no 
such  accusation  had  ever  been  so  much  as  hinted 
ao'ainst  him — at  least  so  far  as  a  former  colleaijue 
of  his  had  been  able  to  ascertain.*  A  Low-Church 
clergyman  once  said  in  a  sermon,  "  There  are  men 
in  our  own  Church  who  say  that  they  find  a  con- 
solation in  the  worship  of  the  Virgin  which  they 
are  unable  to  find  elsewhere."  Being  pressed  to 
give  particulars,  he  declined,  on  the  ground  that 
to  do  so  would  involve  a  breach  of  confidence. 
Another  Low-Church  clergyman  wrote  to  the 
Record  that  a  papal  dispensation  had  been  found 
among  the  papers  of  a  departed  Anglican  priest^ 
authorising  him  to  continue  a  professed  Anglican, 
and  with  it  a  list  of  other  priests  holding  similar 
dispensations.  But  on  being  challenged  to  produce 
the  document,  he  was  obliged  to  own  that  he  could 

Nor  was  this  all.  We  shall  have  hereafter  to 
mention  a  work  entitled  The  Priest  in  Absolution — ■ 
a  work  never  published,  but  printed  for  private 
circulation  amongst  the  clergy,  it  being  a  manual 
of  advice  as  to  the  manner  of  dealing  with  peni- 
tents pastorally,  and  touching  incidentally  upon 
various  classes  of  sins.  We  shall  also  have  to 
introduce  to  our  readers  a  certain  amiable  Low- 
Church  societv  called  the  "  Church  Association," 

*  Church  Times,  January  1,  1875.  The  munber  of  the  Roch 
was  that  for  the  last  week  in  the  previous  December. 

t  The  sermon  was  preached  in  AVest  Hackney  Parish  Church, 
February  2,  1878,  by  the  Eev.  C.  J.  Eobinson. 

DECLINE    IN    MORAL    TONE.  199 

established,  according  to  its  own  professions,  to 
uphold  the  doctrines,  principles,  and  order  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  to  encourage  concerted 
action  for  the  advancement  and  progress  of  spiri- 
tual religion.  In  the  autumn  of  1877  an  anti- 
confessional  lecture  was  delivered  in  Surrey  Chapel, 
Blackfriars,  and  the  lecturer  apologised  for  his  dul- 
ness  by  stating  that  "  the  only  available  copy  of 
The  Priest  in  Absolution  in  possession  of  the  Church 
Association  had  been  sent  to  Birmingham  to  be 
used  in  Mr.  Willett's  case."  This  Mr.  Willett  was 
Vicar  of  All  Saints',  Bromwich,  in  Staffordshire, 
and  the  case  against  him  was  a  false  and  malicious 
libel  in  which,  some  months  before,  he  had  been 
charged  with  an  act  of  immorality.  He  had  then 
demanded  a  commission  of  inquiry,  which  found 
that  there  was  no  jirima  facie  ground  at  all  for 
further  proceedings  ;  his  enemies,  however,  had 
now  applied  for  a  summons  against  him,  and  to 
the  magistrates  of  Birmingham,  there  being  no 
chance  of  obtaining  a  summons  where  the  prose- 
cutors were  known ;  and  the  method  which  was 
being  taken  by  counsel  for  inducing  the  stipendiary 
magistrate  to  grant  a  summons  was  to  allege  that 
Mr.  Willett  was  member  of  a  religious  society, 
called  the  Society  of  the  Holy  Cross — of  which 
also  our  readers  will  hear  more  by-and-by — and 
to  call  upon  him  to  produce  his  copy  of  The  Priest 
in  Absolution.  The  case,  it  is  needless  to  say, 
broke  down  again,  the  applicants  being  dismissed 
and  ordered  to  pay  the  costs.* 

After  this  it  is  hardly  worth  while  to  mention 

*  Church  Times,  October  5,  1877,  p.  557. 

200  DECLINE   IN    MORAL    TONE. 

SO  small  a  peccadillo  as  the  playing  tricks  with 
(not  to  say  stealing)  other  people's  property.  The 
Church  Times  was,  and  still  is,  an  organ  of  ad- 
vanced High-Churchmen ;  and  (as  we  shall  see 
hereafter)  the  Rock  came  into  existence  a  few  years 
later  as  an  organ  of  extreme  Low-Churchmen. 
On  September  28,  1877,  the  following  appeared 
from  the  pen  of  the  Editor  of  the  former  paper  : — 
"  A  lady  writes  to  us  from  the  Lancashire  border 
of  Cumberland  that  her  last  week's  copy  of  the 
Church  Times  did  not  arrive  on  Saturday  as  usual, 
but  that  on  Wednesday  she  received  our  own 
printed  label  enclosing  a  copy  of  the  Bock.  .  .  . 
We  regret  to  add  that  complaints  of  postal  irregu- 
larities are  constantly  reaching  us  of  such  a  nature 
as  leaves  little  doubt  in  our  mind  that  the  Post 
Office  people  in  some  places  have  been  tampered 
with."  * 

Theoretically  there  was  the  same  exaltation  of 
preaching  above  every  other  ordinance,  and  in 
some  cases — probably  in  many — the  theory  was 
acted  upon  to  such  an  extent  that  pastoral  visita- 
tion was  neglected.  In  the  knowledge  of  our  in- 
formant, a  Low-Church  clergyman  was  repeatedly 
asked  to  visit  a  sick  parishioner,  and  excused  him- 
self on  the  ground  that  he  had  to  prepare  or  deliver 
a  sermon  to  young  men.  "  Mr.  M.,"  was  the  reply, 
"  we  don't  want  all  this  preaching,  but  we  do  want 
pastoral  visitation."  Wlien  the  Fever  Hospital  in 
Islington  was  opened  no  Islington  clergyman  would 
visit  it.  A  High-Church  clergyman  then  undertook 
to   visit   it,  in  defiance  of  a  prohibition  from  the 

*  Church  Times,  September  28,  1877,  p.  535. 


very  men  who  would  not  do  tlie  work  themselves. 
At  the  same  time  the  Low-Church  pulpit  had  lost 
much  of  its  power,  partly  owing  to  the  ignorance, 
the  illiterateness,  or  the  intellectual  stupidity  of 
many  Low-Church  preachers,  and  partly  to  a 
notion,  which  some  Low-Church  preachers  had 
taken  up,  that  every  sermon  ought  to  have  in  it  a 
statement  of  the  scheme  of  salvation.* 

As  to  failure  in  intellectual  vigour,  and  the 
manifestation  of  unreasoning  stupidity,  we  may 
note  that  in  a  leading  article  in  the  Church  Times 
for  December  7,  1877,  the  writer  of  that  article 
professed  to  have  examined  Whitaker's  Refer- 
ence Catalogue  of  Current  Literature,  a  publication 
comprising  catalogues  of  stock  issued  by  the  chief 
bookselling  firms  of  the  United  Kingdom  (150  in 
number),  in  order  to  find  out  how  many  authors, 
amongst  Low-Church  clergymen  then  living,  had 
published  works  with  any  claim  to  be  called  theo- 
logy proper,  and  with  any  prospect  of  duration, 
to  the  exclusion  of  mere  hortatory  sermons  (though 
not  academic  lectures  or  conferences),  pietistic 
booklets,  tracts,  religious  biographies,  expositions 
of  Scripture  for  family  reading,  and  the  like.  Out 
of  fifteen  catalogues  examined  with  this  view,  only 
five  contained  any  books  of  the  class  sought,  and 
those  five  contained  the  names  of  only  eight  Low- 
Church  authors ;  and  really  half  of  the  works 
produced  by  these  were  from  the  pen  of  one  sole 
a,uthor,  the  Eev.  T.  E.  Birks. 

As  an  instance  of  unreasoning  narrow-minded- 

*  We  ourselves  heard  this  stated  as  a  sound  naaxim.     So  Mr. 
Bickersteth  noted  in  his  Mevioir  of  Neivton,  pp.  301-2. 


ness,  we  may  notice  having  seen,  in  the  Record,. 
about  the  year  1856,  a  letter  from  a  correspondent 
who  had  been  into  a  country  church  and  seen 
there  a  red  curtain  hanging  up — a  dossel,  if  we 
remember  right.  The  writer  proceeded  to  say  that 
he  did  not  know  anything  of  the  doctrine  preached 
in  the  said  church,  but  that  he  deemed  the  red 
curtain  objectionable  in  itself! 

How  far  a  Low-Churchman  could  go  in  the 
nonsense-line  may  be  seen  by  two  quotations  from 
a  gentleman  who  in  matters  of  the  world  was  not 
by  any  means  a  fool.  John  Macgregor,  Esq., 
Master  of  Arts,  of  Trinity  College,  Cambridge,  and 
well  known  as  the  owner  and  navigator  of  the  Roh 
Roy  canoe,  wrote,  in  1866,  admiringly  of  the  Times 
for  "  exploding  the  '  pernicious  nonsense  '  of  doll- 
dressed  parsons."  *  The  same  gentleman,  in  the 
account  of  a  later  cruise,  relieves  his  stomach  of 
the  following  effusion  : — 

"  For  the  free  Bible —  the  rie^ht  to  tell  what 
Popery  was,  is,  and  wants  to  be — you  must  hush 
to  a  whisper  any  voice  you  have,  and  still  be 
reckoned  even  then  a  monomaniac.  We  must  be 
'  charitable  ' — yes,  and  for  whom  our  charity  ? 
Not  for  our  women,  our  children,  our  herds  of 
ignorant  and  weak  who  are  beguiled,  but  for  the 
army  of  foreign  priests  who  stream  over  the  land, 
and  raise  an  alien  name  above  our  Queen's.  Is  it 
not  just  possible  that  our  wondrous  delicacy  in 
this  matter  is  not  from  love,  but  fear  ?     Eather, 

*  Roh  Boy  on  the  Baltic,  p.  140.  Mr.  Macgregor  professes 
himself  a  member  of  the  AngHcan  Communion  by  speaking  of  the 
control  over  the  clergy  which  (he  says)  "  would  be  exercised  in  our 
Church  by  the  bishop  of  the  diocese." — Ih.  p.  305. 


perhaps,  it  is  because  that  sort  of  tone  pays  best 
in  general  popularity  :  nobody  is  so  sure  of  appro- 
val as  the  man  who  is  '  fiercely  moderate.'  If  you 
want  to  screen  those  people  here  whom  the  Eomish 
Bishop  of  Cracow  (who  ought  to  know  them  best) 
calls  '  furies,  not  women,'  to  keep  English  girls  in 
their  prisons  under  the  '  moral '  restraint  of  cha- 
racter lost  by  escape ;  if  you  want  to  justify  dis- 
loyalty, to  hand  over  to  a  narrow  celibate  clique 
of  alien  hopes  and  sympathies  of  our  nation,  to. 
flout  the  nobles  of  England  cringing  to  the  '  Prince  ' 
last  made  by  an  old  bachelor  abroad,  to  stifle  free 
speech,  to  buy  short  peace  by  bribes,  ever  larger, 
never  enough,  to  fasten  on  us  again  the  fangs  that 
sucked  England's  best  blood  once,  and  to  shame 
our  nation  in  presence  of  the  others  who  have 
writhed  out  from  under  intolerable  coils  ;  if  you 
will  fear  a  huge  system  for  its  power,  and  succour 
it  because  it  is  weak — wonder  at  its  wealth,  yet 
pay  it  because  it  is  poor — bow  down  to  it  as  divine, 
yet  laugh  at  it  only  as  a  ghost ;  if  you  will  enthrone 
error,  and  put  fetters  upon  truth — bind  heavier 
'  them  that  are  fast  bound  in  misery  and  iron,' 
and  set  the  oppressor  free — put  priests  for  our 
lawgivers  and  a  gigantic  imposture  for  our  faith, 
drown  truth  in  fables  and  shut  our  open  Bible  :  if 
you  want  to  do  these  things  with  impunity,  nay,  to 
be  called  '  liberal '  while  you  do  them — only  say 
it  is  in  the  name  of  '  religion  '  and  at  the  biddinsr 
of  the  '  priests,'  and  mind  you  say  '  the  priests 
of  Eome,'  for  to  do  these  things  at  the  bidding 
of  any  others  would  convict  you  of  '  bigotry,'  or 
treason,  or  of  craven  fear."  * 

*  B,oh  Boy  on  the  Jordan,  pp.  435-6. 



Immoral  Period,  continued.  Failure  of  the  Low-Church  Party  in 
Controversy  with  Tractarianism.  Employment  by  Low-Church- 
men of  Force  and  Compulsion.  Occasion  hereof — the  Rise  of 
Ritualism.  Unreasoning  Character  (and  yet  Reasonableness)  of 
Low-Chiu:ch  Opposition. 

"  Brethren,  be  not  children  in  understanding  :  howbeit  in  malice 
he  ye  children,  but  in  xmderstanding  be  men." — 1  Corinthians 
xiv.  20. 

Not  only  had  there  been  in  the  Low-Church  party 
a  failure  of  intellectual  power  in  general,  but  there 
was  a  failure  in  the  intellectual  controversy  with 
Tractarianism  in  particular.  No  Tractarian  had 
been  won  over  to  Low-Church  ways  by  the  force 
of  reasoning.  The  self-assertion  of  a  Ryle  *  and 
a  Waldegrave  f  was  felt  to  be  self-assertion  and 

*  We  have  before  us  a  tract,  not  four  pages  long,  by  the  Rev. 
John  Charles  Ryle,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Liverpool,  entitled  A 
Solemn  Ai^peal !  (a  warning  against  the  doctrine  of  Baptismal 
Regeneration),  in  which  such  phrases  as  "I  see,"  "I  think,"  "I 
say,"  occur  no  less  than  twenty-one  times,  and  the  first  personal 
pronoun  singular  nominative  occurs  thirty-eight  times. 

t  The  following  is  extracted  from  The  Way  of  Peace  :  Four 
Sermons  i^reaclied  before  the  University  of  Oxford  in  1847,  1848, 
hy  the  Hon.  and  Rev.  Samuel  Waldegrave,  M.A.,  London,  1848 : 
"  And  here  I  must  afiirm  that  (whatever  be  the  uses  to  which  man 
has  applied  the  term)  the  Holy  Ghost  when,  in  the  written  Word, 
He  speaks  of  '  the  Church '  absolutely  (in  such  passages,  for  in- 
stance, as  '  Christ  loved  the  Church  ;  '  '  upon  this  rock  I  will  build 
My  Church  '),  doth  not  mean  any  one  visible  ecclesiastical  corpora- 
tion, nor  any  aggregate  assemblage  of  visible  ecclesiastical  corpora- 
tions, but  that  '  whole  family  in  heaven  and  earth,'  known  indeed 
unto  God,  but  '  indefinable  '  by  man,  which  is  styled  '  the  general 
assembly  and  church  of  the  first-born  which  are  written  in  heaven.' 

"  Chosen  of  the  Father  in  Christ  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world  :  '  redeemed  to  God  by  the  blood  of  the  Lamb  out  of  every 
kindred  and  tongue  and  people  and  nation ; '  each  in  due  time 


no  more.  The  exegesis  of  an  Alford  and  an  Ellicott 
had  taught  young  students  to  read  Scripture  with 
their  naked  eyes,  and  not  through  the  flawed 
spectacles  of  Puritanism.  The  distinctive  doc- 
trines of  the  Cathohc  Church  were  therefore  more 
and  more  accepted,  even  in  spite  of  the  Protestant 
prochvities  and  determinations  of  the  learned  com- 
mentators just  named.  The  Broad-Church  school, 
in  fact,  had  drawn  to  itself  most  or  all  of  those 
Low-Churchmen  who  were  disposed  to  think,  and 
who  at  the  same  time  failed  to  accept  the  Catholic 
faith  in  its  integrity ;  while  such  as  were  open  to 
Catholic  reasoning  found  themselves  one  by  one 
among  the  number  of  High-Churchmen.  Among 
these  last  was  John  Henry  Newman,  afterwards 
Cardinal,  who  was  led  to  embrace  the  doctrine  of 
Baptismal  Eegeneration  through  reading  the  work 
of  John  Bird  Sumner,  afterwards  Archbishop,  on 
Apostolical  Preaching ;  and  we  could  mention 
others  of  our  own  personal  acquaintance.  The 
diminution  of  the  Low-Church  party  in  point  of 
members  is  evidenced  by  the  fact  that  for  several 
years  before  1870,  when  the  newspaper-stamp  duty 
was  abolished,  the  stamped  copies  of  the  Record 
had  diminished  by  several  hundreds  every  year, 
while  almost  exactly  the  same  number  was  annu- 
ally added  to  the  circulation  of  the  Guardian,  a 
moderate  High-Church  paper.     As  for  the  remnant 

made  imlling  in  the  day  of  Christ's  power  by  the  Spirit  of  the 
Lord ;  they  are,  partly  triumphant  in  heaven,  partly  militant  ujion 
earth  :  together  they  constitute  the  '  inystical  body  of  God's  dear 
Son.'  "  The  reader  will  observe  that  Mr.  Waldegrave  gives  no 
proof  of  these  assertions ;  the  only  argument  by  which  he  supports, 
them  is  contained  in  the  words  "  I  must  affirm." 


of  tlie  party  weakened  by  tlie  defection  of  their 
former  allies,  and  worsted  in  argument  by  the 
Tractarians,  there  was  no  course  left  them  save  to 
use,  as  far  as  they  could,  the  weapons  of  force  and 
compulsion  in  various  forms  :  the  lawless  violence 
of  mobs,  the  power  of  the  Government  of  the 
country  exercised  in  the  name  and  under  the  pre- 
tence of  law  ;  falsehood  being  solemnly  promul- 
gated from  the  judgment-seat,  a  secular  tribunal 
being  set  up  for  the  settling  of  spiritual  causes, 
and  the  constitution  of  the  country  in  Church  and 
State  being  thus  contravened,  and  unconstitutional 
decrees  enforced  with  pretended  spiritual  censures, 
the  exaction  of  ruinous  costs,  and  imprisonment. 
And  it  is  curious  and  instructive  to  compare  the 
practice  of  the  Low-Church  party  in  the  period 
whereof  we  now  write  with  the  principles  of  the 
same  party  as  declared  a  generation  (or  nearly  so) 
before.  Writing  at  the  end  of  1848  the  Editor  of 
the  Christian  Observer  had  spoken  of  that  "  violence 
which  characterises  the  advocates  of  error  when 
thwarted  in  their  projects,"  *  little  thinking  what 
an  exemplification  his  words  would  have  in  the 
later  history  of  his  own  party. 

Such  means  as  those  just  specified  were  brought 
into  operation  in  the  period  of  which  we  are  now 
to  write,  and  the  antagonism  of  Low-Churchmen 
to  Catholicism  was  shown  in  manifold  ways  besides. 
How  much  the  peace  and  union  among  members 
of  families  was  broken  up  can  never  be  known,  of 
course,  till  that  great  day  when  all  hidden  things 
•shall  be  brought  to  light ;  but  the  cases,  known  to 

•  Preface  to  the  volume  for  1848. 


the  writer,  of  ridicule,  insult,  and  angry  rating  on 
the  Low-Church  side  against  High-Churchmanship 
•can  hardly  have  been  exceptional,  though  one 
case  indeed,  known  to  him,  was,  he  would  venture 
to  hope,  unique — that  of  a  wife  so  far  ignoring 
her  subordinate  place  as  to  assemble  her  children 
and  servants  for  devotion  and  worship  apart  from 
the  husband,  father,  and  master,  under  which 
regime  the  children  soon  learned  to  argue  with 
their  father  as  with  one  in  dangerous  error.  It  is 
curious,  by  the  way,  to  note  that  in  the  case  now 
before  the  writer's  mind,  one  of  the  children  learnt 
to  repent  of  such  conduct,  having  joined  the  com- 
munion of  the  Church  of  Eome. 

As  one  instance  of  the  breaches  caused  in  fami- 
lies by  the  opposition  of  Low-Church  people  to 
those  who  had  adopted  High-Church  ways,  it  may 
be  mentioned  that  the  observance  by  a  High- 
Church  brother,  in  his  own  individual  practice 
alone,  of  the  Church's  seasons  of  fasting  and  absti- 
nence was  specified  in  the  hearing  of  the  writer 
as  a  reason  by  itself  why  his  Low-Church  sisters 
should  refuse  to  live  with  him  ;  and  it  was  specified 
in  such  a  way  as  to  convey  the  idea  that  in  the 
opinion  of  the  speaker  it  was  a  very  sufficient 
reason.  Li  another  case,  which  occurred  in  the 
experience  of  the  writer's  informant,  a  clergyman 
who  had  begun  to  teach  in  his  church  the  Catholic 
faith  in  its  integrity,  and  to  practise  Catholic 
ritual,  was  informed  by  another  member  of  the 
family  that  if  he  persisted  in  so  doing  he  mio-ht 
count  on  being  disinherited. 

In  the  conduct  of  laity  towards  clergy  there  were 


anonymous  letters  written  to  newspapers  hold- 
ing up  the  clergymen  to  public  ridicule  and  detes- 
tation. Abusive  letters  also  were  addressed  to  the 
obnoxious  individuals  themselves.*  The  intro- 
duction of  halfpenny  postcards  gave  opportunity 
to  the  cowardly  of  insulting  or  slandering  them 
publicly  without  fear  of  detection,  and  the  oppor- 
tunity was  not  lost  I  Misrepresentation,  of  course,, 
was  the  order  of  the  day — misrepresentation  on 
the  platform  and  by  means  of  the  press.  Violent 
harangues  were  delivered  against  those  who  (it  was 
alleged)  ate  the  bread  of  the  Church  while  under- 
mining the  Church's  doctrines,  the  ignorant  and 
prejudiced  public  assuming,  in  their  ignorance  and 
prejudice,  that  the  description  applied  with  truth 
to  Hiiih-Churchmen  and  not  to  Low-Churchmen. 

It  was  in  fact  the  old  story,  the  manifestation 
of  man's  natural  enmity  to  God's  truth  and  God's 

*  As  a  specimen  of  one  of  these  the  following  may  be  cited 
from  the  Church  Times  of  December  5,  1879,  p.  766.  It  was 
addressed  to  the  Rev.  E.  Husband,  Incumbent  of  St.  Michael's, 
Folkestone  : — "  Rev.  Husband, — I  see  by  the  Daily  Telegraj^h  you 
have  had  the  audacity,  by  written  words,  to  ask,  in  church,  for  the 
prayers  of  your  congregation  on  behalf  of  that  mad  Mackonochie 
and  his  tools.  You  are  evidently  one  of  the  herd  of  apostate  im- 
postors now  feeding  on  the  Church  of  England,  and  I  (as  a  faithful 
member  of  that  Church,  with  relatives  in  it  and  ancestors  as 
numerously  friends  and  sixpporters  of  it  as  ever  yours  were)  beg 
now  to  comply  with  your  request,  for  once,  and  pray  that  the  curse 
of  God  may  soon  come  upon  the  whole  bunch  of  you. — Yours  truly, 
Thos.  Thomson,  Worcester,  December  1,  1879. — P.S.  You  can,  of 
course,  as  lawless  read  this  to  your  parishionsrs." 

t  The  following  postcard  was  once  received  by  the  present 
writer,  who,  on  another  occasion,  received  one  of  a  character  with 
which  he  will  not  pollute  these  pages  : — "  Be  so  good  as  to  send 
me  your  prices  for  confessings — Unconditional  Confession,  Con- 
ditional ditto  ;  for  Black  Sins,  for  White  Sins,  and  for  the  Vulgar 
fractions  for  yours,  Chas,  Newbury,  Old  Park  Road." 


"  rituIlism."  209 

will ;  and  the  spirit  of  Antichrist,  working  towards 
denial  of  God  manifest  in  flesh.  "  The  carnal  mind 
is  enmity  against  God,  for  it  is  not  subject  to  the 
law  of  God,  neither  indeed  can  be."  In  the  earliest 
times  of  Christianity  this  enmity  had  been  shown 
towards  the  Church  in  general  by  the  Jews  and 
heathen  outside.  In  later  times  it  had  been  shown 
by  heretical  members  of  the  Church  against  those 
who,  holding  the  Catholic  faith,  testified  against 
Arianism.  And  in  these  times  it  was  shown  as^ain 
by  heretical  members  of  the  Church  against  those 
who,  holding  the  same  Catholic  faith,  testified 
against  Zuinglianism.  And  it  was  shown  by  them 
all  the  more  eagerly  and  persistently,  not  only  be- 
cause the  struwale  between  themselves  and  their 
opponents  was  felt  by  them  to  be  a  struggle  be- 
tween two  antagonistic  religions,  but  also  because 
they  felt  that  their  own  credit  for  honesty  in  the 
eyes  of  the  public  could  only  be  kept  up  by  damag- 
ing the  credit  of  their  opponents. 

The  chief  occasion  for  all  this  Low-Church  hos- 
tility had  been  given  by  a  development  which  the 
Tractarian  movement  was  taking :  we  mean,  by 
the  practice  of  what  came  to  be  called  Eitualism, 
as  the  practisers  were  termed  Eitualists :  the  term 
ritualism  being  understood  to  denote  any  altera- 
tion in  the  mode  of  conducting  Divine  Service 
made  in  the  direction  of  Catholicism,  or  of  what  was 
deemed  Catholicism.  Thus  it  included  any  of  the 
following  usages  : — Facing  east  at  prayers ;  recit- 
ing the  Office  musically  ;  singing  hymns  or  anthems 
at  parts  of  the  service  where  no  singing  was  pre- 
scribed in  the  Prayer-book ;  preaching  in  surplice  ; 
n.  15 


vestinsf  the  altar  with  coloured  cloths  according  to 
the  ecclesiastical  season,  and  wearing  stoles  of  like 
colour  ;  the  use  of  the  cross,  either  materially,  by 
placing  it  over  the  altar,  or  in  a  window,  or  on  a 
rood-screen,  or  embroidering  it  on  cloths  or  vest- 
ments, or  actually  signing  it  towards  the  people 
in  benediction,  or  over  the  element  of  a  sacrament 
in  consecration  ;  the  wearing  of  special  vestments 
in  the  celebration  of  the  Holy  Eucharist ;  the 
lighting  of  candles  or  lamps  for  the  sake  of  sym- 
bolism ;  the  ornamenting  of  the  altar  with  flowers  ; 
the  use  of  unleavened  bread  in  the  Eucharist ; 
the  mixing  the  chalice  with  water  ;  the  burning  of 
incense ;  the  use  of  processions,  with  or  without 
banners.  There  were  also  some  other  points  ob- 
served by  some  clergymen,  but  of  too  small  con- 
sequence to  be  worth  mentioning  here. 

This  development  had  commenced  very  soon 
after  the  commencement  of  the  Tractarian  move- 
ment. Of  that  movement,  indeed,  it  was  the  legi- 
timate outcome ;  and  from  the  very  first  it  had 
met  with  opposition  from  the  Low-Church  party. 
In  1837  "  an  eye-witness  "  wrote  to  the  Christian 
Observer  that  a  church  was  being  erected  for  the 
Eev.  W.  Dodsworth,  "  decorated  with  ornaments  im- 
proper in  a  Protestant  place  of  worship,  such  as  the 
heads  and  wings  of  cherubim  and  seraphim,"*  &c. 
This  was  followed  by  a  letter  from  "  an  afflicted 
spectator,"  drawing  attention  to  various  "  porten- 
tous "  innovations  at  Oxford ;  viz.  reading  prayers 
at  the  altar-rail,  facing  east ;  placing  a  cross, 
either  sculptured  or  in  stained  glass,  over  the  altar  ; 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1837,  p.  486. 


the  use  of  a  credence  ;  the  wearing  of  a  stole  by 
deacons  over  the  left  shoulder  only  ;  Mr.  Newman's 
delivery  of  lectures  on  Eomanism,  in  a  chapel 
within  St.  Mary's,  without  any  previous  service 
or  prayer  ;  Dr.  Pusey's  lecturing  apparently  in  a 
similar  way  upon  the  types  and  prophecies.  On 
which  the  Editor  observed  :  "  The  particular  obser- 
vances above  alluded  to  are  peculiarly  to  be  de- 
precated, because  they  are  part  and  parcel  of  a 
doctrinal  and  ecclesiastical  system  which  tends  to 
subvert  the  pure  Gospel  of  Christ,  and  the  foun- 
dations of  the  Protestant  Church."*  And  he 
included  in  his  condemnation  "  Mr.  Newman's 
accompanying  the  administration  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  with  unprescribed  bowings,  approachings, 
retirings,  very  much  after  the  fashion  of  Laud 
at  St.  Catherine-Cree  Church.'  f  Thus  had  begun 
that  stage  in  the  great  Anglican  revival  which  was 
some  years  afterwards  the  most  striking  feature 
which  that  revival  had,  and  which  brought  a  new 
nickname  upon  the  more  advanced  men  of  the 
High-Church  party.  And  thus  began  that  oppo- 
sition, unreasoning  though  reasonable,  on  the  part 
of  their  Low-Church  brethren,  the  carrying  out  of 
which  has  helped  in  no  small  degree  to  fix  upon 
the  Low-Church  party  the  stigma  of  senseless  foil}-. 
The  opposition  was  unreasoning,  for  it  was  little 
else  than  a  blind  repugnance  to  everything  which 
the  Low-Church  party  had  not  taken  up.  But  it 
was  reasonable,  for  it  proceeded  from  the  feeling, 
grounded  in  truth,  that  those   who   adopted   the 

•  Christicm  Observer  for  1837,  p.  505. 
t  n.  p.  506. 



obnoxious  usages  were  of  a  different  religion  to 
the  Low-Churcli  party. 

If,  indeed,  the  religion  of  both  parties  had 
been  one  and  the  same  in  the  main,  only  varying 
according  to  the  different  constitution  of  different 
minds,  the  Low-Churchman  would  have  rejoiced 
to  adopt  the  symbolism  which  his  High-Church 
brother  had  pointed  out.  True  piety  delights  in 
expressing  itself  to  God  in  all  possible  ways,  and 
in  testifying  to  God's  truth  before  men  by  all 
possible  means.  Here  was  a  new  way  found  out — 
the  way  of  symbolism, — new,  we  repeat,  for  it  was 
so  both  to  those  who  found  it  out  as  well  as  to  their 
Low-Church  brethren ; — and  true  piety,  it  might 
have  been  expected,  would  have  rejoiced  to  accept 
the  newly-found  usages.  The  practice  of  wearing 
the  stole  over  the  left  shoulder  alone  supplied 
what,  in  the  absence  of  the  linen  dalmatic,  the 
Church  of  England  entirely  lacked — a  distinctive 
badge  for  a  whole  order  in  the  ministry,  marking 
off  the  deacon  both  from  the  presbyter  above  him 
and  from  the  choirman  or  reader  below  him  ;  and 
thus  was  a  testimony  to  the  desirableness  of  the 
Apostolic  principle,  in  accepting  which  men  of  all 
religious  parties  agreed — "  Let  all  things  be  done 
decently  and  in  order." 

The  use  of  the  surplice  in  the  pulpit  as  well  as 
in  the  desk  might  have  commended  itself  to  every- 
one who  received  his  minister  as  an  ambassador 
for  Christ  rather  than  as  a  mere  man  of  learning ; 
and  in  this  there  was  no  avowed  difference  between 
the  Low-Churchman  and  the  High-Churchman. 

The  chanting  of  the  Psalms  might  have  been 


deemed  proper  by  those  who,  being  acquamted 
with  the  Scriptures,  knew  that  the  Psahiis  were 
composed  for  the  purpose  of  being  sung ;  and  as 
for  reciting  tlie  service  musically  on  one  note,  a 
writer  in  the  Christian  Observer  had  remarked  that 
that  practice  was  sometimes  preferable.* 

To  the  use  of  the  cross,  whether  materially  or 
in  act,  an  outsider  might  well  wonder  what  ob- 
jection could  possibly  be  entertained  b}^  any  Chris- 
tians, and  least  of  all  by  any  Low-Churchmen. 
For  there  is  one  thing  whereof  the  sign  of  the 
cross,  howsoever  presented  to  the  view,  reminds 
the  intelligent  Christian,  and  that  is,  atonement 
through  Christ's  Death ;  and  that  was  the  main 
distinguishing  doctrine  of  the  Low-Church  party 
when  it  arose.  To  put  the  cross,  then,  in  the  most 
consj)icuous  part  of  the  church — to  put  it  over 
the  screen  which  separates  nave  from  chancel ;  to 
mark  it  upon  all  furniture  and  vestments ;  and 
frequently  to  trace  it  on  or  towards  the  person — 
might  reasonably  be  deemed  a  legitimate  following 
out  of  Evangelical  principles. 

Charity,  moreover,  tends  to  union  rather  than 
to  disunion.  It  regrets  every  lack  of  Christian 
unanimity ;  it  rejoices  to  find  points  wherein  men 
may  agree  without  compromising  what  any  of 
them  may  believe  to  be  truth,  and  without  im- 
plying any  encouragement  of  what  is  amiss  in 
practice.     Unfortunately,  however,  all  these  con- 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1826,  p.  19.  The  Eev.  W.  Milton, 
Incumbent  of  St.  Mark's,  Sheffield,  at  a  conference  of  Low-Church 
clergy  held  at  York  in  April  1878,  recommended  chanting  of  the 
Psalms  in  the  evening  at  least,  and  by  a  surpliced  choir. 

214  "popery." 

siderations,  and  such  considerations  as  these,  were 
overborne  by  those  principles  of  ZuingUanism 
which  tend  to  ehminate  everything  objective  from 
our  reUgious  behef,  to  make  rehgion  itself  a  mere 
set  of  subjective  feelings  and  emotions,  and  to 
deny  in  effect  that  Christ  is  the  Saviour  of  the 
body.  To  turn  from  the  people  at  the  Creed  and 
in  prayer  was  an  expression  of  the  truth  that 
God  is  outside  of  us.  To  make  much  use  of  the 
body  in  bowing  and  the  like  was  an  expression  of 
the  truth  that  God  must  be  worshipped  with  our 
bodies  as  well  as  with  our  spirits.  And  whatever 
tended  to  enhance  the  dignity  of  the  Sacraments 
in  their  administration  was  in  direct  contradiction 
to  the  doctrine  of  sacraments  as  taught  by  Zwingli 
and  his  followers ;  whether  it  were  the  use  of 
special  vestments,  or  the  extraordinary  use  of 
artificial  light,  or  the  solemn  bringing  up  of  the 
elements  to  the  altar  from  a  side-table  or  credence, 
or  the  solemn  ablution  of  the  sacred  vessels  as 
soon  as  the  service  was  done. 

This  was  felt  by  both  parties.  But  inasmuch 
as  the  detailed  account  of  the  matter  would  fail 
to  commend  itself  fully  to  intelligent  students  of 
Holy  Scripture,  Low-Church  people  for  the  most 
part  found  it  convenient  to  oppose  Catholic  ritual 
under  the  general  name  of  Popery.  Their  argu- 
ment, in  brief,  was  this  : — Papists  adopt  the  usages 
in  question,  Protestants  do  not ;  therefore,  though 
there  may  be  nothing  wrong  in  the  things  them- 
selves, yet  the  use  of  them  tends  towards  Popery, 
and  is  therefore  not  to  be  allowed ;  and  those 
who  allow  the  use  of  them  are  themselves  working 

"weak  brethren."  215 

their  way  towards  Popery.  This  logic  was  quite 
good  enough  for  the  general  public ;  and  under 
the  influence  of  it  the  general  public  came  very 
easily  to  consider  that  the  revived  usages  were 
wrong  in  themselves.  And  in  this  conclusion  they 
were  practically  encouraged  by  the  Low-Church 
clergy,  who  were  well  pleased  to  have  their 
hearers  opposing  Eitualism  and  Eitualists  on  any 
Protestant  grounds.  And  there  was  in  all  this  a 
certain  amount  of  unreality  and  false  pretence. 
Sometimes  the  plea  put  forth  was  the  danger  of 
offending  weak  brethren  :  the  weak  brethren  being 
in  this  case  the  Low-Church  party,  who  were 
moving  all  the  powers  against  the  Eitualists  ;  and 
these  last  being  the  strong,  who  were  to  show 
Christian  consideration  for  their  brethren.  Thus,  at 
the  consecration,  on  the  28th  of  May,  1859,  of  All 
Saints',  Margaret  Street,  the  congregation  of  which 
was  then  supposed  to  be  the  most  advanced  of  High- 
Church  congregations,  the  Bishop  of  London  (Dr. 
Tait)  preached  from  the  text,  "  Take  heed  lest  by 
any  means  this  liberty  of  yours  become  a  stumbling- 
block  to  them  that  are  weak  ;  "  *  the  announcement 
of  which  compelled  one  respected  High-Church 
clergyman  to  stuff  his  pocket-handkerchief  into 
his  mouth  with  all  haste,  so  utterly  absurd  was  the 
implied  pretence.  Nor  did  it  ever,  so  far  as  we 
can  make  out,  occur  to  those  Low-Churchmen  who 
took  this  line,  that  if  they  and  their  party  were 
the  weak,  and  if  High-Churchmen  were  the  strong, 
and  therefore  bound,  on  St.  Paul's  principles,  to 
avoid   giving   offence,    Low-Churchmen   were    on 

*  1  Cor.  viii.  9. 


their  parts  equally  bound  to  abstain  from  judg- 
ing Higb-Churclimen.*  Sometimes,  too,  the  ob- 
noxious usage  was  decried  as  the  badge  of  a  party. 
Thus  a  friend  of  ours,  a  member  of  St.  John's 
College,  Oxford,  when  Dr.  Wynter  was  President, 
called  upon  Dr.  Wynter  to  ask  his  signature  to 
some  testimonial  wherein,  in  designating  the  col- 
lege, he  had  abbreviated  the  word  "Saint,"  not  with 
"  St.,"  but  with  a  single  "  S.  ;  "  and  the  President, 
with  much  gravity,  noticed  this  to  our  friend,  and 
asked  him  whether  he  was  aware  that  by  using  the 
abbreviation  in  question  he  was  identifying  himself 
with  a  certain  party  in  the  Church.  It  was,  of 
course,  an  obvious  reply  to  those  who  took  such  a 
line, — Very  good,  and  you  have  therefore  nothing 
to  do  save  to  adopt  the  usage  in  question  your- 
selves, as  on  independent  grounds  it  is  desirable 
that  you  should  do,  and  then  it  will  be  the  badge 
of  a  party  no  longer.  The  refusal,  however,  of 
Low-Churchmen  in  general  to  act  thus  showed 
very  plainly  that  the  real  motive  with  Low-Church- 
men in  general  was  a  dislike  of  the  usages  them- 
selves. And  as  in  many  cases  the  usages  were 
a  simple  carrjang  out  of  Prayer-book  rules,  and 
a  development  of  the  Prayer-book  system,  Low- 
Churchmen  did  thus  pass  upon  themselves  a  sen- 
tence of  judgment  that  those  rules  and  that  system 
were  not  by  them  heartily  accepted.  In  connexion 
herewith,  and  in  illustration  of  the  manner  in 
which  Low -Churchmen  assented  and  consented  to 
all  and  everything  contained  and  prescribed  in  and 

*  Eom.  xiv.  3 :  "  Let  not  him  that   eateth  despise  him   that 
eateth  not :  and  let  not  him  that  eateth  not  judge  him  that  eateth." 

THE   MASK    THROWN    OFF.  217 

by  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  may  be  mentioned 
that  at  the  Gateshead  Vestr^^-meeting  which  was 
held  on  Easter  Tuesday  in  the  year  1867,  the 
Eector  of  the  parish,  Archdeacon  Prest,  a  nominee 
of  Bishop  Baring  of  Durham,  urged  the  parish- 
ioners to  sign  a  petition  in  favour  of  the  Clerical 
Vestments  Bill,  then  before  Parliament  (but  which 
■did  not  pass) :  and  did  so  on  the  ground  that  the 
Eucharistic  "  vestments  were  clearly  sanctioned 
by  the  law,  and  therefore  the  sooner  the  law  was 
altered,  in  order  to  put  in  a  position  of  wrong- 
doers those  clergymen  who  wore  vestments,  the 
better."  *  Similarly,  a  writer  in  the  Christian 
Observer  for  the  same  year  recommended  the 
bishops  to  threaten  Eitualists  with  excision  ;  add- 
ing, "  If  the  law  should  prove  to  be  adverse  or 
ineffective,  let  the  bishops  bring  the  whole  weight 
of  their  influence,  in  and  out  of  Parliament,  to 
bear  upon  effecting  ...  an  alteration  of  the  law." 
In  other  words,  "  If  the  Eitualists  should  be 
legally  declared  to  be  faithful,  Low-Churchmen 
were  not  to  secede,  but  to  get  the  law  altered  so 
as  to  square  with  their  unfaithfulness,  and  that  the 
hitherto  faithful  clergy  might  be  driven  out." 

*   Church  News,  May  8,  1867. 



Immoral  Period,  continued.  The  Persecution  becomes  systematic. 
Formation  of  the  "  Church  Association."  Distinct  from  the 
Prayer-book  Revision  Society.  Manner  of  Working.  Liverpool 
Memorials  against  Ritualism.  Agitation  in  the  Salisbury 
Diocese.  Clerical  Vestments  Bill.  Guarantee  Fimd  of  the 
"  Church  Association."  Counter-declaration  to  a  Catholic  Me- 
morial. Archdeacon  Jacob's  Memorial.  Rev.  J.  Ormiston  at 
St.  Alban's,  Holborn.  Archbishop  Longley  and  Mr.  Weld. 
Disturbances  in  Stoke  Newington. 

"  Why  dost  Thou  shew  me  iniquity,  and  cause  me  to  behold 
grievance  ?  for  spoiling  and  violence  are  before  me  :  and  there  are 
that  raise  up  strife  and  contention." — Habakkuk  i.  3. 

As  former  chapters  have  shown,  persecution  was 
not  an  entirely  new  thing  in  the  experience  of 
faithful  Churchmen.  Besides  the  instances  which 
have  been  already  given,  and,  in  particular,  the 
persecution  of  Mr.  Bryan  King  by  the  church- 
wardens and  mob,  aided  and  abetted  by  Bishop 
Tait  of  London  and  the  Queen's  Government,  we 
may  note  that  a  few  months  after  the  consecra- 
tion of  Christ  Church,  Clapham,  which  took  place 
in  May  1862,  one  of  the  churchwardens  called 
upon  the  Incumbent,  the  Eev.  Bradley  Abbott,  and 
intimated  that  unless  he  was  prepared  to  give  up 
reciting  the  Office  in  monotone,  the  party  which 
he  represented  had  determined  to  retire  from  the 
church,  and  to  give  their  clergyman  no  peace  of 
mind  or  body  as  long  as  he  remained  incumbent, 
and  would  do  their  best  to  starve  him  out  of  the 
parish.  We  may  also  mention  the  case  of  the  Eev. 
J.  B.  Pollock,  who  had  taken  charge  of  a  mission 
undel-  Dr.  Oldknow,  then  Vicar  of  Holy  Trinity, 

EEV.    J.    B,    POLLOCK. — THE   "CHURCH   ASSOCIATION."      219 

Bordesley,  Birmingham.  In  a  district  containing 
five  thousand  people,  the  poorest  part  of  Bir- 
mingham, Mr.  Pollock  had  got  his  first  temporary- 
church  opened  in  September  1865.  Then  the 
Record  newspaper  opened  its  columns  to  false 
statements,  and  the  stirring  up  of  opposition  in 
other  ways,  and  in  1868  a  Protestant  mob  took 
to  assembling  outside  the  church,  hooting  the  con- 
gregation, and  attempting  to  maltreat  Mr.  Pollock  ; 
insomuch  that  he  had  to  be  protected  by  the  police 
during  a  space  of  three  months. 

Now,  however,  the  persecution  became  syste- 
matic as  well  as  persistent.  The  object,  it  will  be 
remembered,  was  to  eliminate  from  the  Church  of 
England  such  points  of  Catholic  faith  and  Catholic 
worship  as  were  contravened  by  Zuinglianism : 
and,  with  this  view,  the  plan  was  to  use  every 
means  that  could  be  used  against  the  maintainers 
of  Catholic  faith  and  Catholic  worship  in  their  in- 
tegrity. Catholic  principles  were  to  be  attacked 
in  Catholic  persons.  Some  leading  Low-Church- 
men put  their  heads  together,  and  in  1865  there 
came  into  being  a  society  which  before  many  years 
had  passed  became  a  great  religious  scandal — the 
greatest,  perhaps,  with  which  English  religion  has 
ever  been  disgraced :  a  society  which  thus  pro- 
claimed itself  on  the  title-pages  of  its  reports : — 
"  The  Church  Association,  instituted  1865,  to 
uphold  the  doctrines,  principles,  and  order  of  the 
United  Church  of  England  and  Ireland,  and  to 
counteract  the  efforts  now  being  made  to  pervert 
her  teaching  on  essential  points  of  the  Christian 
faith,  or  assimilate  her  services  to  those  of  the 


Churcli  of  Eome,  and  further  to  encourage  con- 
certed action  for  the  advancement  and  progress 
of  spiritual  religion  :  "  the  last  clause  having  been 
added  in  1871. 

This  association  was  not  the  first  of  its  kind. 
The  "  British  Society  for  Promoting  the  Eeligious 
Principles  of  the  Eeformation  "  existed  in  1830,  and 
had  Mr.  Wilberforce  for  one  of  its  Vice-presidents. 
We  do  not  know  whether  this  was  the  same  as 
"  the  British  Eeformation  Society,"  which  was  es- 
tabhshed  in  1827.  The  latter  society  changed  its 
designation  subsequently  to  "  The  Protestant  Ee- 
formation Society." 

Eound  the  "Church  Association"  all  the  old 
champions  of  what  was  called  Evangelical  Protes- 
tantism speedily  ralhed.  Nobody,  indeed,  could 
be  found  of  sufiicient  worldly  dignity  to  be  invested 
with  the  office  of  President.  But  there  was  a  long 
list  of  Vice-presidents,  including  the  Marquis  of 
Westmeath,  five  earls  (Bandon,  Cavan,  Enniskillen, 
Eoden,  and  Shrewsbury  and  Talbot),  six  other 
noblemen  (Lord  Berners,  Lord  Fitzwalter,  Viscount 
Hill,  Lord  Leconfield,  Viscount  Nevill,  and  Lord 
Oranmore),  four  deans  (Close  of  Carhsle,  Henry 
Law  of  Gloucester,  Goode  of  Eipon,  and  E.  N. 
Hoare  of  Waterford),  three  archdeacons  (Hill, 
Phelps,  and  Prest),  and  five  members  of  Parliament 
(Messrs.  Clement,  Horsfall,  Lefroy,  Long,  and 
Newdegate).  The  Chairman  was  John  Campbell 
Colquhoun,  Esq.  :  the  Vice-Chairman,  Thomas  E. 
Andrews,  Esq.  The  lay  member's  annual  sub- 
scription was  fixed  at  ten  shillings  ;  the  clerical 
member's,  at  half  that  sum  :    support  being  thus 


sought  from  those  classes  in  which  vulgar,  ignorant, 
fanatical  Protestantism  was  most  prevalent.  The 
Council  consisted  of  forty  members,  clerical  and 
lay  ;  besides  which  there  was  a  General  Committee 
of  fifty  clergymen  and  as  many  laymen,  and  a  large 
Honorary  Committee.  It  was  not  necessary  that 
any  member  should  be  a  communicant :  it  was 
enough  that  he  deemed  himself  a  member  of  the 
Established  Church. 

The  means  by  which  the  "  Church  Association  " 
professed  to  carry  out  its  ends  comprised  the  follow- 
ing : —  (1)  Pubhshing  information,  holding  pubhc 
meetings,  presenting  memorials,  &c.  (2)  Pressino- 
for  an  authoritative  disapproval  and  suppression 
of  all  ceremonies,  vestments,  and  ornaments  which 
departed  from  the  practice  of  the  Church  as 
sanctioned  by  three  centuries  of  usage.  (3)  Endea- 
vouring to  obtain  such  a  legal  decision  as  should 
prevent  the  continuance  of  doctrines  and  prac- 
tices which,  being  [according  to  the  Association] 
borrowed  from  Eome,  corrupted  the  integrity  and 
endangered  the  safety  of  the  Eeformed  Church  of 
England.  (4)  Assisting  aggrieved  parishioners  to 
obtain  protection  from  practices  which  [accordino- 
to  the  Association]  drove  them  from  their  parish 
church.  (5)  Promoting  a  reform  of  the  ecclesi- 
astical courts. — And  the  plan  of  the  campaio-n, 
as  made  manifest  by  subsequent  proceedings,  em- 
braced three  main  particulars  : — (1)  To  make 
the  country  in  general  too  hot  for  Eitualists.  (2) 
To  oust  certain  well-known  Eitualists  from  their 
churches,  or  to  punish  them  otherwise,  as  courts 
of  law  might  order ;    and  so  to  strike  terror  into 


Others  of  the  same  party  ;  and  with  this  view,  on 
pretence  that  certain  rubrics  were  of  doubtful 
meaning,  to  get  legal  definitions  promulgated  in 
the  interests  of  the  Low-Church  party.  (3)  The 
getting  the  Church's  law  altered,  so  that  if  the 
teaching  and  practice  of  Eitualists  were  in  any 
points  legal  now,  the  same  teaching  and  practice 
might  ill  those  points  be  made  illegal  for  the  future. 
Thus  in  1867  the  Association  circulated  a  petition 
for  signature  which  was  addressed  to  the  Queen, 
and  a  statement  along  with  it  that  the  "  Church 
Association "  desired  to  have  the  "  Ornaments' 
Eubric  "  expunged  on  the  ground  (apparently  an 
Irish  ground)  that  the  observance  of  it  was  repug- 
nant to  and  inconsistent  with  that  liturgy  of  which 
it  formed  (and  still,  thank  God,  forms)  a  part. 
This,  however,  the  "  Church  Association  "  was  con- 
tent, for  the  most  part,  to  leave  to  be  effected  by  its 
sister  in  Protestantism,  the  Prayer-book  Eevision 
Society  ;  except  so  far  as  judges  might  be  induced 
to  usurp  the  functions  of  the  Legislature,  and  to 
alter  the  law  under  pretence  of  interpreting  it. 
Both  societies  were  working  towards  the  same  end, 
the  extermination  of  Catholic  faith  and  Catholic 
worship  as  distinguished  from  Protestantism  ;  but 
they  undertook  to  work  in  two  different  ways.  The 
Prayer-book  Eevision  Society  refused  to  accept  the 
Prayer-book  as  it  was  ;  the  "  Church  Association  " 
pretended  to  accept  the  Prayer-book,  and  to  be 
angry  with  the  Eitualists  for  disobeying  it.  And 
thus,  though  a  very  few  persons  were  members  of 
both  societies,  yet  for  the  most  part  it  was  felt  that 


membership  in  the  one  was  morally  inconsistent 
with  membership  in  the  other. 

The  action  to  which  the  "  Church  Association  " 
stood  committed  from  the  very  first  was  one  of 
open  and  uncompromising  hostility  to  the  persons 
of  Eitualistic  clergy.  One  of  their  first  published 
leaflets,  an  Address  of  the  Lay  Members  of  the  Council 
of  the  Church  Association  to  the  People  of  England 
(on  which  title  we  shall  have  a  remark  to  make  by- 
and-by),  commences  thus  : — "  In  the  present  paper 
we  propose  to  suggest  practical  steps  to  be  adopted 
by  those  whose  clergymen  unfortunately  practise 
the  rites  and  preach  the  doctrines  of  Eome. 

"  The  test  by  which  the  laity  may  detect  such  a 
man  is  easily  applied.  If  the  clergyman  calls  him- 
self a  priest  [a  note  here  indicates  that  by  "  priest  " 
is  meant  a  sacrificing  priest]  ;  if  he  tells  his  people 
that  by  his  priestly  power  he  can  absolve  them  from 
sin ;  if  he  says  that  by  his  priestly  act  he  can  turn 
the  bread  and  wine  of  the  Lord's  Supper  into  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ — the  case  is  clear,  we  can 
see  what  he  is  :  he  is  not  a  pastor  of  the  Eeformed 
Church  of  England  ;  he  is  a  priest  of  the  Church  of 

"  He  must  be  treated  as  such.  .  .  .  Such  persons 
must  be  treated  as  men  having  the  jjlague.  They 
must  be  put  in  quarantine,  lest  they  infect  us.  If 
it  is  said  that  such  treatment  is  annoying — of 
course  ;  so  are  all  precautions  against  disease  ;  but 
though  vexatious,  they  are  needful." 

This  was  addressed  "  to  the  people  of  England." 
Not  solely  to  those  members  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 


land  who  alone,  it  might  be  thought,  had  any  right 
to  hold  any  opinion  or  to  take  any  action  in  such 
matters, — that  is  to  say,  those  members  of  the 
Church  who  obeyed  the  Church's  rule  about  com- 
municating at  least  three  times  a  year ;  nor  even 
to  members  of  the  Church  of  England  in  general, 
— but  "  to  the  people  of  England,"  including  Dis- 
senters of  all  denominations — Unitarians,  Quakers, 
Jews,  Infidels,  and  Atheists.  And  we  shall  see 
hereafter  how  the  Church  Association  allowed 
Dissenters  to  join  them  in  persecuting  faithful 
Anglican  priests. 

To  stir  up,  then,  the  people  of  England  to  such 
a  course  of  action  as  that  specified,  tracts  were 
published  and  distributed,  lectures  delivered,  and 
meetings  addressed  by  the  emissaries  of  the  Asso- 
ciation all  over  the  kingdom ;  the  object  being 
in  every  case  to  stir  up  bad  feeling  against  the 
Eitualists.  And  whatever  might  be  the  adver- 
tised subject  of  the  lecture,  the  lecturer  was  sure 
to  attack  the  Eitualists  before  he  had  done.  And 
having  this  bad  end  in  view,  the  speakers  and 
writers  of  the  Association  were  not  over-scrupulous 
as  to  what  they  said  or  wrote  ;  and  in  fact  they 
acquired  a  bad  name  for  misrepresentation  of  truth 
in  various  ways.  Sometimes  the  falsity  was  of  a 
general  character :  as  when  it  was  said  that  the 
Eomish  priests  turned  their  backs  to  the  people  in 
order  to  practise  deception ;  *  or,  that  Eitualists 
prayed   not  only  to  the  Blessed  Virgin  but  to  a 

*  Lecture  delivered  at  Wincanton  in  Somersetshire,  April  27, 
1882,  by  the  Rev,  G.  Blake  Concanon,  and  reported  in  the  Somerset 
Cov/nty  Mail,  May  4. 


perfect  host  of  saints,  whether  canonised  or  other- 
wise ;  *  or,  that  they  sought  to  crush  the  liberties 
of  the  laity  ;  f  or,  that  they  only  wanted  an  oppor- 
tunity to  bring  the  old  instruments  of  torture  into 
use  again.  J  Of  this  kind  was  the  assertion  that 
the  Catholic  Eevival,  so  called,  had  been  "  only 
another  name,  from  first  to  last,  for  a  Eitualistic 
conspiracy,  planned  deliberately  from  the  very  first, 
for  the  single  and  sole  purpose  of  assimilating  the 
whole  doctrine  and  ritual  of  the  Protestant  Church 
of  this  country  to  the  doctrine  and  ritual  of  the 
Church  of  Eome  ;  "  §  in  proof  of  which  nothing 
was  adduced  beyond  a  letter  written  originally 
by  a  Eitualistic  layman,  and  which  had  been  com- 
municated to  the  Union  Review.  Such,  again,  was 
the  libel  published  in  the  Eeport  presented  to  the 
Association  at  their  tenth  annual  meeting,  and 
speaking  of  the  "  Eitualistic  clergy  "  as  "  Eoman- 
isers  "  whose  aim  was  "  to  blind  the  eyes  of  the 
public,  and  silence  all  inquiry,  until  the  period 
arrives  for  taking  over  their  congregations,  and,  if 
possible,  the  whole  Church,  into  the  arms  of  the 
Papacy."  Such,  again,  was  the  still  more  porten- 
tous falsehood  that  to  the  speaker's  knowledge 
there  were,  at  the  time  then  present,  j^eople  in  the 
Church  of  England  w^lio  were  receiving  Protestant 

*  Lecture  delivered  at  Wincanton  in  Somersetshire,  April  27, 
1882,  by  the  Kev.  G.  Blake  Concanon,  and  reported  in  the  Somerset 
County  Mail,  May  4. 

t  First  Address  of  the  Lay  Members  of  the  Council  of  the 
Church  Association  to  the  People  of  England,  p.  8. 

X  Lecture  delivered  at  Crewe,  on  Bitualism  and  Sacerdotalism 
Inconsistent  ivith  Loyalty  to  the  Church  of  England,  by  the 
Eev.  Dr.  Potter,  cited  in  the  Church  Times,  December  9,  1881. 

§   The  True  History  of  the  Eitualistic  Conspiracy,  p.  1. 
11.  16 


pay  and  were  at  the  same  time  doing  the  work  of 
Eome,  and  had  dispensations  from  the  Church  of 
Eome  ;  *  a  statement  which,  being  challenged,  the 
speaker  was  unable  to  substantiate.  Sometimes, 
however,  the  falsehood  was  more  particular,  and  of 
a  nature  to  criminate  the  utterer  with  utterinc?  it 
wittingly  ;  as  when  a  certain  Eitualistic  clergjaiian 
was  charged  with  teaching  that  the  man  who  took 
a  concoction  of  wafer  and  oil  would  go  up  to  heaven, 
and  the  man  who  did  not  would  go  to  perdition ;  f 
or  when  the  Editor  of  The  Church  and  the  World 
was  charged  with  endeavouring  to  show  that  no- 
minal members  of  the  Church  of  England  could 
hold  all  the  dogmas  of  Eome,  and  observe  its 
ritual,  without  changing  their  communion.  ^ 

Active  and  direct  persecution,  however,  was  the 
principal  kind  of  weapon  which  the  Church  As- 
sociation intended  to  use.  We  shall  see  this  in 
detail  very  soon  ;  at  present,  if  our  narrative  is  to 
follow  the  order  of  time,  we  must  digress  a  little 
for  the  purpose  of  noting  a  few  occurrences  which 
took  place  shortly  after  the  Church  Association 
was  formed.  For  in  the  month  of  January  1867 
a  hundred  and  twenty-eight  clergymen  of  the  Dio- 
cese of  Chester  (which  then  included  Liverpool) 
memorialised  their  Bishop  (Dr.  Jacobson)  against 
Eitualism.      The  Bishop   replied  that  if  rubrical 

*  Statement  made  by  the  Rev.  James  Ormiston  at  a  Church 
Association  meeting  held  in  Mr.  W.  H.  Greening's  rooms, 
Birmingham,  December  4,  1877.  The  correspondence  relating 
hereto  was  published  in  the  Church  Times,  January  4,  1878.  See 
also  above.  Chap.  LII, 

t  Lecture  by  the  Rev.  G.  Blake  Concanon,  to  which  reference 
is  made  above. 

X  First  Address  of  the  Lay  Members  of  the  Council  of  the 
Church  Association,  &c.,  p.  2. 


conformity  was  to  be  insisted  on,  defect  as  well  as 
excess  would  have  to  be  condemned  ;  thus  admi- 
nistering an  implied  rebuke  to  the  memorialists, 
who,  it  may  be  presumed  without  uncharitable- 
ness,  were  no  better  than  other  Low-Churchmen 
in  the  matter  of  obedience  (or  rather  disobedience) 
to  the  rules  of  the  Prayer-book.  The  Christian 
Ohsei'ver,  commenting  on  the  Bishop's  reply,  asked, 
"  Can  anything  be  conceived  more  absurd  than 
this  ?  "  *  Later  on  in  the  same  year  more  than 
nine  thousand  laymen  belonging  to  Liverpool  and 
the  neighbourhood  sent  up  a  similar  memorial. 
The  Bishop  made  a  similar  reply  to  that  which  he 
had  made  to  the  clergy,  suggesting  also  that  one 
school  of  thought  should  give  up  its  extravagances 
and  the  other  be  more  hearty  and  exact  in  com- 
pliance with  the  directions  of  the  Eubric  ;  and  this 
was  stigmatised  by  the  Christian  Observer  as  "  a 
specimen  of  mingled  levity  and  self-conceit !  "  f 
A  Mr.  Du  Boulay,  writing  to  the  Marquis  of  West- 
minster, said,  "  Li  this  Diocese  of  Salisbury  may  be 
seen  wooden  frames,  the  gift  of  the  Bishop,  with  a 
wooden  top,  six,  seven,  or  nine  feet  long,  standing 
on  four,  six,  or  eight  pillars,  and  capable  of  bearing 
several  tons  weight.  Now  since  the  proper  use  of 
a  Communion-table  is  simply  to  support  the  sacra- 
mental bread  and  wine,  to  what  purposes,  we  may 
ask,  were  these  massive  frames  destined  ? "  And 
thereupon  he  called  upon  the  laity  to  "watch  over 
that  ancient  Standard  of  the  Faith,"  their  Com- 

*   Christian  Observer  for  1867,  p.  166. 
t  lb.  p.  743.  t  lb.  pp.  166-7. 

I  0—2 


In  March  was  held  a  county  meeting  for  Dor- 
setshire against  Eituahsm,  tlie  Earl  of  Shaftesbury 
in  the  chair.  And  on  the  11th  of  the  same  month 
the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury  introduced  in  the  House  of 
Lords  "  a  bill  for  better  enforcing  uniformity  in 
the  clerical  vestments  and  ornaments  to  be  worn 
by  ministers  of  the  United  Church  of  England  and 
teland  in  the  performance  of  public  worship.'^ 
This  bill  enjoined  the  surplice  and  hood  (or  tippet) 
for  use  in  saying  public  prayers,  and  ministering 
sacraments  and  other  rites  of  the  Church,  but  left 
the  black  gown  in  the  pulpit  untouched.  It  ex- 
empted archbishops  and  bishops  from  its  operation. 
The  second  reading  of  this  bill  was  moved  in  the 
House  of  Lords  on  the  13th  of  May,  but  was  lost. 

We  must  now,  however,  come  back  to  the 
"  Church  Association."  They  were  proposing,  as 
we  have  already  remarked,  to  bring  active  and 
direct  persecution  to  bear  upon  the  Eitualist 
clergy;  and  with  this  view,  in  1867,  a  "Guarantee 
Fund  "  was  opened  to  enable  the  Council  to  assist 
parishioners  who  might  apply  to  them  for  advice 
and  expenses  of  appeals  to  the  Law  Courts  under- 
taken for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  the  law  on  any 
point  involving  what  the  Council  called  Eomanising 
doctrines  or  Eitualistic  practices.  The  amount 
asked  for  on  this  behalf  was  originally  £10,000, 
and  afterwards  £50,000,  which  last  sum,  and  more 
besides,  was  soon  promised,  and  in  due  time  paid. 

In  this  same  year  (1867)  a  memorial  signed  by 
twenty-one  Anglican  priests,  and  expressing,  both 
negatively  and  positively,  their  belief  as  to  the 
doctrines  of  the  Eeal  Presence  and  the  Eucharistic 


Sacrifice,  was  presented  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  (Dr.  Longley).  Hereupon  the  "  Church 
Association"  got  up  a  counter-declaration,  and 
made,  in  their  next  annual  report,  the  audacious 
statement  that  the  views  expressed  by  the  twenty- 
one  clergymen  not  only  "  were  never  held  by  any 
divine  of  any  mark  in  England,  whether  of  the 
High-Church  or  Low-Church  school,"  but  were 
"  simply  borrowed,  without  acknowledgment, 
from  the  Church  of  Eome."  The  counter-declara- 
tion protested  especially  against  the  following 
doctrines  : — That  the  Supper  of  the  Lord  is  a  Pro- 
pitiatory Sacrifice ;  that  the  Body  and  Blood  of 
Christ  are  objectively  present  in  the  Elements ; 
that  all  who  partake  of  the  Elements  receive  the 
Body  of  Clu"ist ;  that  clergymen  are  sacrificing 
Priests  ;  that  they  possess  judicial  authority  to  for- 
give sin,  and  that  the  forgiveness  of  sin  is  not 
complete  without  priestly  absolution ;  that  the 
clergy  are  authorised  to  receive  confessions  as  an 
habitual  part  of  religious  practice,  and  to  give 
formal  absolution  from  sin ;  and  that  Christ  is  to 
be  adored  as  personally  present  in  the  Elements.* 
An  attempt  was  made,  too,  in  the  spring,  on  the 
part  of  Archdeacon  Jacob  of  Winchester  and  some 
Eural  Deans,  to  get  up  an  address  to  the  Bishop 
of  Winchester  from  the  clergy  of  his  diocese,  charg- 
ing some  of  their  clerical  brethren  with  attempt- 
ing  to  introduce,  "  under   cover  of  an  elaborate 

*  The  reader  will  bear  in  mind  that,  in  quoting  the  language  of 
the  "  Church  Association,"  we  do  not  bind  ourselves  to  an  approval 
of  it  as  an  accurate  expression  of  the  views  of  Cathohc  divines ; 
e.g.  the  epithet  "propitiatory"  would  need  qualification  or  ex- 
planation, lest  it  should  be  taken  in  a  wrong  sense. 


Eitualisni,  some  of  the  most  pernicious  errors  of 
the  Church  of  Rome,"  and  with  having  defiantly 
adopted  practices  of  an  undeniably  Eoman  cha- 
racter."*    In  the  summer  the  Bishop  of  Durham 
(Dr.    Baring)   inhibited   the    Bishop-coadjutor    of 
Edinburgh  from  officiating  in  the  Durham  Diocese, 
and  deprived  the  Hon.  and  Eev.  Francis  Eichard 
Grey,  Eector  of  Morpeth,  of  the  office  of  Eural 
Dean;    the  reason  of  this  action   being  that   the 
Bishop-coadjutor  had  commenced  a  sermon  with 
the  Invocation,  and  the  Eural  Dean  had  worn  a 
black  stole  with  three  crosses  embroidered  on  it. 
It  was,  too,  we  believe,  in  this  same  year  that  the 
Eev.    James    Ormiston,    afterwards    an   influential 
member  of  the  Church  Association,  did  an  act  of 
aggressive  Protestantism  by  insulting  a  Eitualistic 
clergyman  while  in  the  exercise  of  his  ministry  in 
his  own  church.     At  a  time  when  the  Eev.  Alex- 
ander Heriot  Mackonochie,  Vicar  of  St.  Alban's, 
Holborn,  was  sitting  in  his  vestry  to  hear  confes- 
sions, Mr.  Ormiston  placed  himself  among  those 
who  were  waiting  to  go  in,  thus  pretending  that 
he,  like  the  rest,  wanted  spiritual  consolation  or 
other  pastoral  ministry.     When  his  turn  came  he 
went  into  the  vestry  and,  instead  of  making  any 
real  confession  of  sin  or  bringing  up  any  spiritual 
burden  at  all,  proceeded  to  read  from  a  paper  a 
kind   of  protest   against  Catholic   practices.      Of 
course   he   was   speedily    stopped,   but    had    the 
effrontery  to  ask  for  absolution  before  leaving  the 
vestry.      On    the    matter    being    reported    to    the 
Bishop  the  latter  required  Mr.  Ormiston  to  apo- 

*  Church  Netvs,  March  20,  18G7. 

MR.    ORMISTON    AT   ST.    ALBAN'S,    HOLBORN.  ^31 

logise,  and  Mr.  Ormiston  did  apologise  accord- 
ingly, and  at  least  one  leading  Low-Chnrcliman, 
the  Eev.  Daniel  Wilson,  Vicar  of  Islington,  ex- 
pressed disapprobation  of  his  condnct.  He  does 
not,  however,  seem  to  have  repented  of  his  profane 
impertinence,  for  he  afterwards  wrote  to  the  Con- 
stitution in  these  terms  : — "  Let  the  uproar,  slander, 
and  persecution  which  my  late  effort  to  unmask  the 
demoralising  Eitualistic  confessional  of  St.  Alban's, 
Holborn,  has  produced,  witness  to  the  low  state  of 
religious  morality  in  our  day.  From  all  points  of 
the  ecclesiastical  compass  the  storm-winds  of  wrath 
and  disapprobation  have  vented  their  strength. 
But  what  of  it  all  ?  The  word  of  covenant-promise 
stands  firm :  '  No  weapon  that  is  formed  against 
thee  shall  prosper,  and  every  tongue  that  shall  rise 
against  thee  in  judgment  thou  shalt  condemn. 
This  is  the  heritage  of  the  servants  of  the  Lord.' " 
In  writing  thus  Mr.  Ormiston  gave  a  striking  illus- 
tration of  the  way  in  which  Low-Church  people 
could  pervert  Scripture,  under  the  blinding  in- 
fluence of  self-conceit  or  party-conceit ;  of  which 
also  his  conduct  gives  a  remarkable  instance. 

In  this  year  a  long  correspondence  took  place 
between  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (Dr. 
Longley)  and  a  Mr.  Weld,  who  claimed,  though 
on  doubtful  grounds,  to  be  churchwarden  of  Folke- 
stone. In  this  correspondence  Mr.  Weld  com- 
plained of  altar-cross,  candlesticks,  re-table,  floral 
decorations,  and  some  other  things ;  also  that  the 
Curate  elevated  the  elements  and  used  the  mixed 
chalice.  In  September  the  services  at  St.  Matthias', 
Stoke  Newington,  were  attended  by  persons  con- 


nected  with  the  Protestant  Institute,  who  sought 
by  various  antics  to  cast  ridicule  upon  the  ritual 
of  that  church.  One  produced  a  maniple,  which 
he  used  re^^eatedly  as  a  pocket-handkerchief.  He 
was  turned  out,  and  then  with  his  accomplices 
assembled  a  mob  outside,  which  went  to  the  house 
of  Mr.  Brett,  the  churchwarden,  and  broke  the 

The  chief  business,  however,  of  the  year  was  the 
commencement   of   the   regular    set   persecution ; 
which  we  will  begin  in  the  next  chapter  to  relate. 
In  the  same  year  an   attempt  was  made  on  the 
part  of  the  Government  to  allay  the  bitter  feeling 
which  the  revival  of  Catholic  ritual  had  excited 
throughout  the  Church.    A  Eoyal  Commission  was 
appointed  to  examine  into  the  subject,  with  a  view 
to  explaining  or  amending  the  rubrical  directions 
in   the   Prayer-book.     The  Commission,  however, 
did   not   find  favour  in   Low-Church  eyes.      The 
majority  was  composed  of  High-Churchmen ;  un- 
fortunately, perhaps,  but  necessarily,  inasmuch  as 
High-Churchmen  were  the  only  people,  generally 
speaking,    who   had   any  real   knowledge   of  the 
matters  to  be  considered  :  and  therefore,  of  course, 
Low-Churchmen  were  ready  to  see  enormities  in 
all  the  Commissioners'  proceedings.     We  shall  see 
hereafter  how  those  proceedings  ended. 

*  Church  Neivs,  October  2  and  IG,  1867. 



Immoral  Period,  continued.  Commencement  of  Systematic  Perse- 
cution in  the  Case  of  the  Rev.  A.  H.  Mackonochie :  approved 
by  the  Low-Chiurch  Party  generally.  Visitation-charge  of 
Bishop  Hamilton  of  Salisbury :  consequent  Opposition :  Meetings 
and  Petitions.  Ritual  Commission.  Low-Church  Dishonesty. 
Pan-Anglican  Conference.  Low-Church  Promotions.  Further 
Proceedings  against  Mr.  Mackonochie.     Paid  Spies. 

"  These  are  the  things  that  ye  shall  do ;  speak  ye  every  man 
the  truth  to  his  neighbour ;  execute  the  judgment  of  truth  and 
peace  in  your  gates  :  and  let  none  of  you  imagine  evil  in  your 
hearts  against  his  neighbour ;  and  love  no  false  oath  :  for  all  these 
are  things  that  I  hate,  saith  the  Lord." — Zechariah  viii.  16,  17. 

We  are  to  relate  in  the  present  chapter  the  com- 
mencement of  the  systematic  persecution  of  Catho- 
lics in  the  Church  of  England.  And  as  we  proceed 
we  are  to  have  before  our  minds  the  strange  spec- 
tacle of  a  Church  established  by  law,  and  whose 
rules  as  to  public  worship  were  enforced  by  the 
straitest  subscriptions,  and  one  party  in  it  noto- 
riously defective  in  its  obedience  to  those  rules,  and 
yet  persecuting  another  party  for  alleged  excesses 
in  regard  of  the  same,  and  those  in  authority  not 
-only  winking  at  the  defect,  but  punishing  the  ex- 
cessive obedience.  And  we  shall  see  hereafter  how 
the  persecution  was  carried  as  far  as  to  the  infliction 
of  ruinous  costs,  the  despoiling  of  goods,  and  the 
imprisonment  of  persons. 

Here  it  may  be  well  to  consider  a  question  which 
will  not  fail  to  occur  as  we  go  on,  viz.  Had  these 
proceedings  the  concurrence  of  the  Low-Church 
party  in  general?  or  was  the  Low^-Church  party 
split  up  from  this  time  into  two  camps,  one  holding 


with  the  persecutors,  and  the  other  not  ?  In  answ^er 
to  this  it  must  be  said  that,  with  a  very  few  excep- 
tions, the  "  Church  Association  "  had  at  this  time, 
and  for  almost  the  whole  period  wdth  wdiich  the 
present  narrative  is  concerned,  the  tacit  assent  and 
concurrence  of  the  wdiole  Low^-Church  party.  One 
lecture,  indeed,  w^hich  appears  to  have  been  un- 
usually virulent,  occasioned  one  clergyman  who 
had  heard  it  to  w^rite  to  the  Secretary  of  the  local 
branch  of  the  Association,  saying  that  he  could  not 
go  to  bed  until  he  had  written  to  say  that  he  must 
place  his  charity  above  his  Protestantism,  and  re- 
sign his  position  in  a  branch  that  could  allow  so 
uncharitable  and  unchristian  a  lecture  to  be  deli- 
vered.* Another  memlier  withdrew  on  the  o;round 
that  his  membership  brought  him  into  contact  wdth 
such  a  disreputable  and  drunken  set  of  men.  The 
correspondent  of  the  Church  Times,  who  stated  thi& 
of  his  own  know^ledge,  added,  "  I  know  of  worse 
charges  that  might  be  brought  against  some  of  these 
godly  defenders  of  the  Protestant  religion."  f  At 
a  later  period,  too,  when  the  proceedings  of  the 
Association  had  been  of  a  more  scandalous  cha- 
racter than  before,  a  protest  was  raised  by  the 
Record,  and  several  more  withdrawals  from  the 
Association  took  place.  In  general,  however,  Low- 
Churchmen  allow^ed  the  main  part  of  the  W' ork  done 
by  the  Association,  how^ever  they  might  disapprove 
of  some  of  the  details.     They  did  not  wish  to  soil 

*  The  clergyman  was  the  Kev.  Henry  BoUand,  Vicar  of  St. 
James's,  Wolverhampton,  in  which  town  the  lectiue  in  question 
had  been  delivered  by  the  Eev.  Dr.  Wainwright.  The  incident  is. 
mentioned  in  Mt/  Prosecution,  by  the  Kev.  K.  W.  Enraght,  p.  8. 

t  Church  Times,  January  10,  1879. 


their  own  fingers,  but  they  were  well  content  that 
others,  with  whose  principles  they  fully  sympathised, 
should  soil  theirs  in  persecuting  the  common  foe. 

We  have  seen  that  the  "  Church  Association " 
had  secured  promises  of  over  £50,000  to  guarantee 
whatever  costs  they  might  incur  in  their  pious  and 
charitable  work.  Being  thus  ensured,  as  far  as 
might  be,  against  bankruptcy,  the  Association  lost 
no  time  in  getting  to  action  ;  and  not  without  in- 
voking the  Divine  blessing; — somewhat  as  we  have 
heard  concerning  a  leader  of  brigands,  who,  being 
himself  a  reader  in  the  Orthodox  Eastern  Church, 
would  not  set  out  in  the  exercise  of  his  calling 
until  he  had  recited  with  his  troops  the  office  for 
the  day.* 

*  By  the  Constitution  of  the  Association  it  was  ordered  that 
the  meetings  both  of  the  Council  and  of  committees  should  always 
be  opened  with  pi^ayer.  In  case  any  reader  should  desire  to  know 
the  kind  of  supplications  which  the  Council  deemed  fit  for  putting 
up,  we  transcribe  a  few  passages  from  the  form  of  prayer  used  at 
the  opening  of  the  Chiu'ch  Association  Conference,  November  26, 
1867.  (It  would  seem  that  the  prohibition  of  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer  in  the  times  of  Pm-itan  supremacy  was  not  considered  by 
the  Comicil  any  infringement  of  religious  Liberty.)  "We  have 
been  permitted  through  Thy  gi'acious  Providence,  now  for  three 
centuries,  to  enjoy  as  a  Church  the  inestimable  privilege  of  re- 
ligious liberty.  .  .  .  And  now.  Lord,  what  shall  we  say  ?  We  are 
ashamed  to  lift  up  our  faces  before  Thee.  Fatal  errors  are  propa- 
gated in  our  midst  which  threaten  the  existence  of  our  Eeformed 
Church.  False  brethren  have  crept  in  among  us,  who  are  setting 
at  defiance  her  recognised  doctrines,  and  would  bring  us  again 
imder  the  yoke  of  spiritual  bondage.  Our  eyes  are  tiirned  unto 
Thee.  We  desire  to  commit  our  cause  into  Thy  hand.  .  .  .  Bless 
the  means  which  are  now  adoj^ted  for  the  exposure  of  error. 
Grant  Thy  blessings  to  the  counsels  of  the  Church  Association, 
that  it  may  maintain  the  Truth  among  us.  May  we  have  a  single 
eye  to  Thy  glory.  May  no  party^feelings  mar  our  work.  ,  .  .  The 
enemy  is  bold  and  daring,  but  Thy  power  is  aU- sufficient  to  re- 
strain. .  •  .     And  now.  Lord,  behold  their  threatenings  "  (!),  &c. 

236  REV.    A.    H.    MACKONOCHIE. 

Who  should  be  the  first  object  of  attack  ?  or  ra- 
ther (as  Church  Associationist-speakers  attempted 
more  than  once  to  make  the  pubhc  beheve)  of 
self-defence  ?  Several  circumstances  marked  out 
the  Eev.  Alexander  Heriot  Mackonochie,  Vicar  of 
St.  Alban's,  Holborn,  as  peculiarly  eligible.  He  had 
signed  the  memorial  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury on  Eucharistic  doctrine  ;  his  church  was  in 
a  central  part  of  London,  and  had  eclipsed  for  the 
time  the  Church  of  St.  Matthias,  Stoke  Newington, 
as  that  had  eclipsed  All  Saints',  Margaret  Street, 
and  as  All  Saints',  Margaret  Street,  had  eclipsed  St. 
Paul's,  Knightsbridge,  and  St.  Barnabas's,  Pimlico. 
The  endowment  of  the  living  was  not  more  than 
£150  a  year,  with  a  house  for  the  Vicar  and  two 
Curates,  each  of  which  Curates  had  £100  a  year 
by  gift  of  the  founder,  the  Hon.  J.  G.  Hubbard ; 
and  it  was  yet  to  be  seen  whether  Mr.  Mackonochie 
and  his  friends  would  be  able  to  match  the  Church 
Association  in  point  of  funds.  Such  considerations 
may  well  have  influenced  the  Council  of  the  Asso- 
ciation in  determining,  as  they  did,  after  prayer,  to 
commence  proceedings  against  him.  Not,  however, 
with  any  feelings  of  envy,  or  hatred,  or  malice,  or 
any  uncharitableness  against  the  man ;  oh  no ! 
those  holy  and  righteous  people  who  undertook  to 
prosecute  him  were  actuated  solely  by  a  desire  to 
have  the  law  defined ;  of  this  the  public  were  as- 
sured on  the  authority  of  the  "Church  Association" 
itself,  and  could  anything  be  more  satisfactory  ?  * 

*  Mr,  Martin  afterwards  wrote  to  the  Bishop  of  London  (Dr. 
Jackson)  in  these  terms  : — "  It  was  understood  when  proceedings 
were  originally  taken  that  their  object  was    simply  to    ascertain 


And  if  anybody  had  hinted  mildly  that  the  cleri- 
cal members  of  the  Association,  or  some  of  them, 
were  in  the  habit  of  violating  a  great  many  laws 
of  the  Church  even  then,  the  reply  was  ready  to 
hand.  Wliat  High-Churchman  has  ever  prosecuted 
a  Low-Church  brother  for  any  alleged  breach  of 
the  Church's  law  ?  So  that  the  question  whether 
any  rubric  was  or  was  not  to  be  obeyed  in  the  way 
in  which  High-Churchmen  obey  it — e.g.  whether 
the  black  gown  might  be  worn  by  a  preacher  in  the 
middle  of  the  Communion-service,  or  whether  the 
Athanasian  Creed  might  be  omitted  from  Morning 
Prayer  on  the  Feast  of  St.  Matthias,  or  whether  the 
Offertory  sentences  and  Prayer  for  the  Church 
Militant  might  be  omitted  on  a  Sunday  when  there 
was  no  communion — had  never  been  even  raised. 
Unfortunately,  however,  there  was  the  possibility  of 
a  lawsuit  being  undertaken  on  an  amicable  under- 
standing, each  side  agreeing  to  pay  its  own  costs ; 
and  the  fact  that  of  this  possibility  the  Council  of 
the  "  Church  Association"  uniformly  forbore  to  avail 
themselves  proved  that  every  profession  made  by 
them  of  a  mere  desire  to  ascertain  the  requirements 
of  the  law  was  an  utter  falsehood. 

The  prosecution  of  Mr.  Mackonochie  was  to  be 
conducted  "  at  the  sole  expense  and  under  the 
supervision  "  of  the  "  Church  Association."  *     Wlio 

authoritatively  the  law  of  the  Church  on  certain  points,  which,  when 
ascertained,  would  be  acquiesced  in  on  both  sides  and  obeyed  " 
[Church  Times,  June  25,  1880).  Mr.  Martin  no  doubt  believed  so, 
but  the  "  Church  Association  "  very  soon  made  it  plain  that,  if  that 
had  been  their  sole  object  at  first,  it  did  not  continue  their  sole 
object  very  long. 

*  Annual  Beport  of  the  "  Church  Association,"  1867,  p.  22. 

238  MR.    JOHN    MARTIN 

should  be  the  nominal  prosecutor  ?  who  should  be 
the  As^grieved  Parishioner,  not  to  be  turned  away 
from  his  Parish  Church  on  every  vain  protest  which 
might  turn  up,  but  whose  conscience,  faithful  to  the 
Protestant  traditions  of  the  Anglican  Church,  and 
offended  at  the  Eomish  ceremonial  which  he  was 
compelled  to  witness  Sunday  after  Sunday,  and 
especially  when  he  received  the  Holy  Communion 
at  the  hands  of  his  parochial  clergy,  should  have 
fled  for  refuge,  of  his  own  accord,  to  the  Guarantee 
Fund  of  the  "  Church  Association  ?  "  The  person 
originally  selected  by  the  Council  to  act  this  cha- 
racter died  suddenly  ;  another  parishioner  there- 
fore had  to  be  proposed  to  the  Bishop  of  London 
(Dr.  Tait)  as  the  promoter  of  the  intended  suit  instead 
of  the  deceased.  Eventually  a  person  named  John 
Martin  was  found  ;  he  did  not  reside  within  the 
parish  of  St.  Alban's,  and  therefore  was  not  legally 
a  parishioner  ;  but  he  was  secretary  to  some  schools 
situated  within  the  parish,  and  his  name,  conse- 
quently, was  on  the  parish  rate-book  :  and  him  the 
Bishop  deemed  suitable.  It  may  seem  strange  to 
the  non-legal  mind  that  the  Bishop,  who  was  to  be 
to  a  certain  extent  a  judge  in  these  proceedings, 
should  be  asked  for  an  opinion  on  such  a  subject, 
or,  if  asked,  should  give  one  ;  but  when  Dr.  Tait 
had  been  promoted  to  the  See  of  London  he  said, 
as  was  stated  by  his  then  principal  chaplain,  that 
if  he  held  the  see  ten  years  he  would  not  leave  a 
Puseyite  in  it.*  Thus  Mr.  Martin  was  induced 
(although,  as  he  afterwards  said,  reluctantly)  to  sign 
a  document  giving  the  "  Church  Association  "  power 

*  Church  Times  correspondent,  October  18,  1878. 


to  use  his  name  in  the  suit  which  was  reall}-  theirs, 
they,  on  the  other  hand,  undertaking  to  indemnify 
him  in  any  costs  which  might  be  incurred  ;  *  and 
on  the  28th  of  March,  1867,  the  Bishop,  having 
received,  nominally  from  Mr.  Martin,  a  paper  of 
charges  against  Mr.  Mackonochie,  sent  letters  of 
request  to  the  Court  of  Arches,  under  the  provisions 
of  the  Clergy  Discipline  Act,  that  the  case  might 
be  tried  in  that  court.  The  charges  preferred  were 
four  in  number  : — (1)  The  elevation,  during  or  after 
the  Prayer  of  Consecration  in  the  Order  for  the 
Administration  of  the  Holy  Communion,  of  the 
paten  and  cup,  and  the  kneeling  or  prostrating 
himself  before  the  consecrated  elements  ;  (2)  using 
lighted  candles  on  the  Communion-table  during  the 
celebration  of  the  Holy  Communion,  when  such 
candles  were  not  w^anted  for  the  purpose  of  giving 
light;  (3)  using  incense  in  the  celebration  of  the 
Holy  Communion  ;  and  (4)  mixing  water  with  the 
wine  used  in  the  administration  of  the  Holy  Com- 

The  hearing  of  the  case  commenced  June  15  be- 
fore Dr.  Lushington,  and  proceeded  on  the  4tli  of  the 
following  December  before  Sir  Eobert  Phillimore. 

Meanwhile  the  Protestant  opposition  to  Catholic 
doctrine  was  stirred  into  greater  activity  by  the 
Visitation-charge  delivered  by  the  Bishop  of  Salis- 
bury (Dr.  Walter  Kerr  Hamilton),  first  at  Brid- 
port,  on  the  16tli  of  May.  This  charge  was  mainty 
devoted  to  a  statement  and  vindication  of  the 
following  doctrines  : — (1)  That    certain  men    had 

*  Statement  in  the  World,  cited  in  the  Church  Tinies,  June 
25,  1880. 

240  BISHOP  Hamilton's  visitation-charge. 

had  entrusted  to  them  by  God,  as  fellow-workers 
with  Him,  supernatural  powers  and  prerogatives  ; 
(2)  that  God  has  been  pleased  to  give  to  them, 
His  ministers,  the  power  of  so  altering  the  elements 
of  bread  and  wine  as  to  make  them  the  channels 
of  conveying  to  the  soul  for  its  subsistence  the 
refreshing  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ;  (3)  that  as 
Christ,  the  ascended  Lord,  is  ever  pleading,  so  the 
clergy,  His  ministers,  plead  on  earth  that  which 
He  pleads  in  heaven ;  and  (4)  that  God,  who 
alone  can  forgive  sins,  had  delegated  to  them.  His 
representatives,  the  power  and  authority  of  express- 
ing to  those  who  were  fit  to  receive  it  the  pardon 
of  their  sins.  The  Bishop  proceeded  to  say  that 
there  was  a  time  to  speak  as  well  as  a  time  to 
keep  silence ;  and  that  he  believed  the  time  for 
being  outspoken  to  have  arrived  in  his  diocese, 
and  he  had  acted  on  that  occasion,  God  knew, 
agreeably  to  his  conviction,  and  without  any 
mental  reserve.  "  At  this  point,"  says  the  printed 
report,*  "  the  Eev.  William  C.  Terapler,  the  Eector 
of  Burton  Bradstock,  stepped  from  his  seat  into  the 
aisle,  in  front  of  his  Lordship,  and  exclaimed  with 
much  fervour,  '  I  believe  there  is  a  time  to  speak 
and  a  time  to  be  silent ;  let  those  that  are  on  the 
Lord's  side  follow  me,'  and  he  turned  and  walked 
out  of  the  church,  followed  by  one  churchwarden. 
This  scene  created  a  profound  impression,  and  his 
Lordship  was  for  a  moment  apparently  much  dis- 
concerted. Litense  silence  prevailed  for  a  minute 
or  two,  and  then  his  Lordship  said,  '  I  would  only 
remind  you  that  this  is  a  court,  and  the  clergy  are 

*  Cited  in  the  Christicm  Observer  for  1867,  p.  498. 


bound  to  attend  it,  though  their  consciences  are 
not  bound  to  receive  all  they  hear.  Of  course 
a  person  may  be  punished  for  any  contempt  of 
court.'  He  then  proceeded  with  the  reading  of 
his  Charge ;  but  before  he  had  concluded,  though 
he  omitted  what,  he  said,  would  occupy  several 
hours  reading,  every  churchwarden  had  left  the 
church,  and  the  clergy  manifested  signs  of  weari- 
ness. In  the  afternoon  the  churchwardens  held  a 
meeting,  and  unanimously  adopted  the  following 
address  to  the  Bishop,  which  was  signed  by  thirty- 
four  of  them  :  '  My  Lord, — As  churchwardens  of 
the  several  parishes  within  your  diocese,  we  have 
this  day  attended  your  triennial  visitation,  and 
heard  the  Charge  delivered  by  you  to  your  clergy. 
Feeling  that  we  have  also  responsible  duties  to 
perform,  in  endeavouring  to  preserve  our  Eeformed 
Church  from  innovations  and  practices  inimical  to 
its  pure  faith,  we  avail  ourselves  of  the  occasion 
to  express  our  deep  regret  at  some  of  the  opinions 
and  doctrines  therein  enunciated.  We  believe  them 
to  be  at  variance  with  those  principles  for  which 
our  forefathers  so  nobly  and  successfully  struggled 
more  than  three  hundred  years  ago,  when  they 
protested  against  the  errors  of  the  Church  of 
Eome.  Entertaining  the  highest  possible  respect 
for  your  Lordship's  personal  character  and  office, 
we  nevertheless  feel  it  incumbent  on  us  to  assert 
our  belief  that  unless  a  check  is  at  once  and 
promptly  made,  both  l^y  clergy  and  laity,  to  those 
innovations  and  practices  which  are  alien  to  the 
feelings  of  all  sound  Churchmen,  a  considerable 
portion  of  those  who  are  now  sincerely  devoted  to 
II.  17 


the  Establisliment  will  be  induced  to  withdraw  to 
Dissenting  places  of  worship,  or  be  insidiously 
attracted  towards  the  Church  of  Eome,  and  there- 
by destroy  the  harmony  and  weaken  the  confi- 
dence which  has  [sic]  so  long  and  happily  existed 
amongst  them.'  "  Apparently  it  did  not  occur  to 
these  wiseacres  that  the  failure  to  impose  a  check, 
promptly  and  at  once,  upon  the  innovations  and 
practices  in  question  might  cause  a  considerable 
number  of  Churchpeople  to  become  Dissenters  or 
Eomanists,  and  yet  that  the  innovations  in  doctrine 
might  be  perfectly  true,  and  the  practices  perfectly 
right,  and  in  accordance  with  the  Prayer-book. 

Seventy  clergymen  of  the  Diocese  of  Salisbury 
appealed  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterl)ury  against 
their  diocesan  in  consequence  of  his  Charge  ;  *  but 
nothing,  for  aught  that  we  have  heard,  ever  came 
of  this  appeal.  The  opposition,  however,  which 
was  raised  generally  against  him  l3y  the  Low- 
Churchmen  of  his  diocese  caused  the  Bishop  a 
great  deal  of  distress  and  anxiety,  and  was  thus 
the  means  of  hastening  his  decease,  which  took 
place  about  two  years  later  f  A  principal  leader 
in  the  opposition  was  the  Eev.  Lord  Sydney  Godol- 
phin  Osborne,  Eector  of  Durwestoii-with-Bryan- 
ston.  This  priest  had  not  been  always  careful  to 
maintain  the  professional  dignity  of  his  clerical 
position,  and  doubtless  felt  specially  aggrieved 
at  hearing  it  publicly  declared  by  his  bishop  that 
every  priest  was  responsible  for  the  exercise  of 
supernatural  powers. 

*  Life  of  Bishop  Gray  of  Cajjetown,  vol.  ii.  p.  336. 
t  August  1,  1869. 


In  the  November  of  this  year  (1867)  there  was 
an  extraordinary  meeting  of  Parhament ;  and  Lord 
Portman  presented  a  petition  from  more  than 
3,000  people  in  the  Diocese  of  Sahsbury,  Protes- 
tants of  different  denominations,  protesting  against 
the  doctrines  stated  in  the  Bishop's  Charge,  and 
praying  for  the  estabhshment  of  a  tribunal  by 
which  the  doctrines  might  be  considered*  On  the 
3rd  of  the  preceding  June  the  Government  had 
endeavoured  to  allay  the  excitement  ]jy  appointing 
a  Commission  "  to  inquire  into  the  rubrics,  orders, 
and  directions  for  rei2fulatin<j^  the  course  and  con- 
duct  of  public  worship,  &c.,  according  to  the  use 
of  the  United  Church  of  England  and  Ireland," 
"  and  more  especially  with  reference  to  the  orna- 
ments used  in  the  churches  and  chapels  of  the 
said  United  Church,  and  the  vestments  worn  by 
the  ministers  thereof."  The  first  report  of  the 
Commission  is  dated  the  19tli  of  the  following 
August.  In  it,  speaking  of  the  vestments  lately 
introduced  into  certain  churches,  they  said  :  "  We 
find  that  while  these  vestments  are  regarded  by 
some  witnesses  as  symbolical  of  doctrine,  and  by 
others  as  a  distinctive  vesture  whereby  they  de- 
sire to  do  honour  to  the  Holy  Communion  as  the 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1867,  p.  994.  This,  we  presume,  was 
the  petition  concerning  which  a  correspondent  in  the  Church  Neivs 
detailed  some  particulars  which  did  not  increase  its  moral  weight. 
One  person  to  whom  a  copy  of  it  was  brought  for  signature  noted, 
among  the  twenty-six  names  which  that  copj^  bore,  three  of  persons 
whose  religion  might  be  anything  or  nothing,  and  some  which  had 
been  inserted  without  the  knowledge  of  their  owners.  There  were 
oxAy  five  names  of  communicants,  and  six  of  persons  in  the  habit  of 
coming  to  church  more  or  less  regularly.  Church  News,  December 
11,  1867. 


244  RITUAL    commissioners'    REPORT. 

highest  act  of  Christian  worship,  they  are  by  none 
regarded  as  essential,  and  they  give  grave  offence 
to  many  ;  "  and  added,  "  We  are  of  opinion  that 
it  is  expedient  to  restrain  in  the  pubhc  services 
of  the  United  Church  of  England  and  Ireland  all 
variations  in  respect  of  vesture  from  that  which 
has  Ions;  been  the  established  usawe  of  the  said 
United  Church,  and  we  think  that  this  may  be 
best  secured  by  providing  aggrieved  parishioners 
with  an  easy  and  effectual  process  for  complaint 
and  redress."  From  this  report  ten  Commissioners 
dissented  on  various  grounds.  The  third  report 
proposed  that  revision  of  the  Lectionary  which  has 
now  been  made  by  Act  of  Parliament  to  super- 
sede that  in  the  Prayer-book  of  1862.  This  re- 
port, dated  January  12,  1870,  was  signed  by  all 
the  Commissioners,  Sir  Joseph  Napier  alone  ap- 
pending a  note  that  his  signature  was  to  be  taken 
with  a  certain  qualification,  which  he  specified. 
In  so  far  as  the  Commissioners  had  discussed  the 
subject  of  ornaments  and  vestments,  no  other  re- 
sult was  obtained  save  the  demonstration  of  the 
impossibility  of  compromise  between  the  two  prin- 
cipal contending  parties  in  the  Church. 

We  ought  to  state  that  on  the  appointment  of 
the  Commission  a  few  clergymen  memorialised  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (Dr.  Longley),  intimat- 
ing their  desire  that  no  alteration  in  the  Prayer- 
book  which  the  Commissioners  had  proposed  might 
be  made  by  Parliament  till  sanctioned  by  Convo- 
cation. The  Archbishop  agreed  with  these,  and 
assured  them  that  Convocation  would  be  duly  con- 
sulted.      This    repl)^  the   Christian    Observer  con- 


sidered  as  alarming  and  indecent ;  *  and  the  Earl 
of  Shaftesbury  asked  the  Archbishop  in  the  House 
of  Lords  (June  8)  what  his  authority  for  giving 
it  had  been.  The  Archbishop  answered  that  his 
authority  was  law  and  precedent. 

The  dishonesty,  conscious  or  unconscious,  of 
some  among  the  Low-Church  party  appeared  this 
year,  in  the  opening  of  "  free  churches  "  in  various 
parts  of  the  country  where  the  parochial  clergy 
were  Eitualistic  ;  for  the  promoters  of  these,  while 
professing  attachment  to  the  Church  of  England, 
and  expressing  themselves  as  anxious  to  obtain  the 
services  of  "  pious  clergymen,"  as  they  called  them 
— that  is  to  say,  of  Low-Churchmen  who  had  been 
regularly  ordained — did  yet,  in  their  use  of  the 
Prayer-book,  adopt  various  alterations  and  omis- 
sions, and,  when  they  could  not  get  a  "  pious  cler- 
gyman," were  content  with  the  ministrations  of  a 
Dissenter. f  It  may  be  remarked,  too,  that  when  the 
members  of  the  congregation  of  Surrey  Chapel  kept 
their  eighty-fourth  anniversary,  which  they  did  this 
year,  the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury  and  the  Hon.  Arthur 
Kinnaircl  were  among  the  speakers  who  assisted  in 
doing  honour  to  the  occasion.  Surrey  Chapel,  it 
will  be  remembered,  had  been  built  for  the  Eev. 
Eowland  Hill,  independently  of  the  Established 
Church,  and  was  a  Nonconformist  meetino--house. 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1867,  p.  661, 

t  lb.,  p.  823,  Jolm  DevereU,  Esq,,  of  Farlington,  Hants,  ad- 
mitted to  the  Eitual  Commissioners  in  that  year  that  he  had  built 
a  chapel  "  for  members  of  the  Church  of  England  protesting  in 
self-defence  against  the  Eomanising  principles  and  practices  as 
carried  out  in  "  his  locaUty.  A  Dissenter  was  aj^pointed  to  offi- 
ciate, he  being  willing  to  use  the  Church-services,  But  the 
Athanasian  Creed  was  never  said. 


The  September  of  this  year  (18C7)  was  remark- 
able for  the  assembhng  of  the  first  Pan- Anglican 
Conference,  under  the  presidency  of  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury.     How  this  Conference  originated  is 
thus  told  by  the  Eev.  T.  Bedford  Jones,  Chaplain 
to  the  Bishop  of  Ontario  (Dr.  Lew^is).     "  Some  time 
in  the  year  1864  I  was  walking  with  the  Bishop  of 
Ontario  near  the  city  of  Kingston,  in  his  diocese, 
and  the   conversation  turned  upon  the  condition 
and  prospects  of  our  Anglican  communion.     The 
Bishop   on  that   occasion   unfolded   his   cherished 
plan  to  effect,  what  we  both  desired,  the  consolida- 
tion of  the  Church,  the  union  of  Christendom.    The 
plan  was  first  to  secure  a  meeting  of  all  the  English 
and  Colonial  bishops ;  after  this,  as  the  next  step, 
to  invite  the  American  prelates  to  a  second  meet- 
ing :  and  he  thought  that  if  such  a  conference  or 
council  could  by  any  good  fortune  be  brought  about, 
that  then,  as  a  third  step,  representations  of  other 
Catholic  communions  might  come  to  unite  their 
strength  with  us,  and  so  at  last  Eome  might  be  faced 
by  a  compact  body,  a  great  council  of  Catholics, 
which  she  should  respect  before  the  world,  and  so 
be  forced  to  come  to  terms.      I  remember  how  the 
scheme  was  discussed  by  the  Bishop  and  myself, 
and  finally  dismissed  as  almost  Utopian.     However, 
the  following  year  (1865),  just  prior  to  the  meeting 
of  the  Provincial  Synod  of  Montreal,  the  Bishop  of 
Ontario  agani  mentioned  the  subject  of  our  conver- 
sations, and  told  me  that  he  was  about,  after  much 
consideration,  to  bring  it  forward  in  the  House  of 
Bishops ;   and  I  remember  perfectly  the  doubt  he 
entertained  about  the  success  of  his  intended  2:)ro- 


position,  which  was  to  petition  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  to  summon  a  meeting  of  the  bishops 
of  the  AngUcan  Communion.  And  I  am  able  to 
state,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  that  the  resolution  em- 
bodying this  proposition  w^as  actually  drawn  up  at 
Cornwall,  on  the  Bishop's  way  to  Montreal,  in  the 
house  of  the  late  Archdeacon  Patton.  This,  I 
believe,  the  Archdeacon  himself  stated  in  a  letter 
to  the  Guardian  in  September  1867.  The  Pro- 
vincial Synod  of  1865  met.  The  bishops  sat  by 
themselves.  There  were  then  but  five  forming  '  the 
House,'  and  of  these  five  the  Bishop  of  Ontario 
alone  survives.  Therefore  it  can  now  do  no  harm 
to  anyone  to  say  that  on  the  breaking  up  of  the 
Synod  on  one  of  the  days  of  meeting,  the  Bishop 
of  Ontario  joined  me  outside  the  hall,  and  said, 
'  Well,  I  had  hard  work  to  get  that  through  our 
house.  They  all  pooh-poohed  it  at  first  and  said 
we  should  only  be  laughed  at ;  so  I  had  to  stand 
up  (which  is  a  thing  we  never  do)  and  make  a 
speech  to  my  four  brethren  of  twenty  minutes. 
And  then  the  Metropolitan  said,  "  Well,  it  can  do 
no  harm  at  all  events,"  and  so  the  memorial  was 
finally  carried  unanimously.' 

"  Soon  after  this  Dr.  Lewis  had  a  most  serious 
illness,  which  made  him  an  invalid  for  a  consider- 
able portion  of  the  year  1866.  He  was  ordered 
to  England  for  change  of  climate  during  the  hot 
summer  months,  and  here  he  had  frequent  inter- 
views with  Archbishop  Longley,  the  Bishop  of 
Oxford  (Wilberforce),  and  others.  Bishop  Selwyn 
was  then  in  New  Zealand,  and  Bishop  Gray  was  at 
Capetown  ;  and  although  the  idea  may  have  passed 


tlirough  their  minds,  they  had  nothing  whatever  to 
do  with  tlie  utterance  of  it,  nor  the  passing  of  it 
into  action.  The  result  of  the  Canadian  Memorial 
and  of  Dr.  Lewis's  conferences  with  the  Archbishop 
and  bishops  in  1866  was,  that  the  first  Pan- Anglican 
Conference  was  summoned."  * 

Every  bishop  of  the  Anglican  Communion  was 
invited  by  the  Archbishop  to  the  Conference  ;  and 
the  invitation  brought  together  18  English  prelates, 
5  Irish,  6  Scottish,  24  Colonial,  4  ex-Colonial,  and 
19  American.      They  met  to  deliberate  on  the  best 
way  of  promoting  the  Ee-union  of  Christendom — 
the  notification  of  the  establishment  of  new  sees — 
letters  commendatory  from  clergymen  and  laymen 
passing  to  distant  dioceses — subordination  in  our 
Colonial   Church    to   Metropolitans — discipline    to 
be  exercised  by  Metropolitans — court  of  the  Metro- 
politan— question  of  appeal — conditions  of  union 
with  the  Church  at  home — notification  of  proposed 
missionary  bishoprics — subordination   of  mission- 
aries :  f  matters,  we  should  have  thought,  of  in- 
terest to   the  whole   Church.     As,  however,  Low- 
Churchmen  were  not  the  only  ones  present — and, 
indeed,    two  Low-Churchmen,    the  Archbishop  of 
York  (Dr.  Thomson),  and  the  Bishop  of  Durham 
(Dr.  Baring),  had,  we  believe,   formally  declined 
the   invitation  —  everything    connected   with    the 
Conference  was,  to  the  mind  of  the  Christian  Ob- 
server, exceedingly  painful. J 

*  Church  Times,  August  30,  1878,  p.  480. 

t  Conference  of  Bishops  of  the  Anglican  Communion,  holden 
at  Lambeth  Palace,  September  24-27,  1867  (Eivington),  p.  9. 
X   Christian  Observer  for  18C7,  p.  903. 


We  must  now,  however,  come  back  to  the 
"  Church  Association,"  and  the  formal  persecution 
which  it  had  commenced.  Besides  the  case  in 
which  the  victim  was  Mr.  Mackonochie,  another 
Eitual  case  had  come  on  about  the  same  time, 
viz.  that  known  as  Flamank  v.  Simpson.  In  this 
Mr.  Thomas  Flamank,  churchwarden  of  the  parish 
of  East  Teignmouth,  Devon,  prosecuted  the  Eev. 
Thomas  Burne  Simpson,  Perpetual  Curate  of  the 
same  jjarish,  on  several  charges.  The  case  was 
not  under  the  control  of  the  "  Church  Association," 
but  aid  was  given  by  the  Association  in  support  of 
it.*  Mr.  Simpson  was  prosecuted  for  using  lighted 
candles  at  the  celebration  of  the  Holy  Eucharist, 
using  the  mixed  chalice,  elevating  the  paten  and 
chalice  above  his  head  after  consecration,  placing 
the  alms  on  a  stool  and  not  on  the  Holy  Table,  and 
wilfully  omitting  the  word  "  all "  from  the  Bene- 
dictory Prayer  at  Mattins  and  Evensong.  The  last 
charge  shows  the  animus  of  the  prosecutor,  anxious 
to  get  an  adversary  punished  as  much  as  possible. 
It  was  denied  by  the  defendant,  and  abandoned  by 
the  prosecutor.  The  defendant  admitted  that  he 
had  elevated  the  elements  while  proceeding  with 
the  consecration-prayer.  The  other  charges  also 
were  admitted  by  him ;  though  as  to  placing  the 
alms  on  a  stool,  he  denied  that  he  had  done  it  with 
any  other  view  than  to  obtain  more  room  upon 
the  altar. 

The  matter  was  brought,  in  the  first  place,  before 
the  Bishop  of  Exeter  (Dr.  Philpotts),  who  sent  the 
case  to  the  Court  of  Arches  by  letters  of  request ; 

*  Annual  Rejiort  of  the  Church  Association,  1867,  p.  22. 


and  that  court  sat  to  hear  it  on  February  5,  1868^ 
Sir  Eobert  Philhmore,  Dean  of  Arches,  presiding. 
The  arguments  occupied  three  days ;  and  on  March 
28,  1868,  judgment  was  dehvered  by  him  both  in 
this  case  and  in  that  of  Mr.  Mackonochie.  In  each 
case  the  decision  was  that  the  elevation,  as  charged 
by.  the  promoters,  was  illegal ;  the  use  of  two  lights 
legal;  and  the  mixing  of  the  chaHce  in  time  of 
Divine  Service  illegal.  As  to  placing  the  alms  on 
the  stool,  Mr.  Simpson  admitted  that  he  had  done 
wrong,  and  submitted  to  the  judgment  of  the 
court.  Mr.  Mackonochie  was  admonished  not  to- 
recur  to  two  practices,  already  discontinued  by  him 
under  protest,  of  censing  persons  and  things,  and 
elevating  the  Sacrament,  and  to  abstain  from  mixing 
the  chalice  in  time  of  Divine  Service.  Kneehng, 
however,  in  the  course  of  the  consecration-prayer 
was  not  deemed  illegal.  As  to  costs,  Mr.  Simpson 
was  to  pay  £80  nomine  expensarum  ;  while  no  order 
was  made  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Mackonochie. 

The  same  year  (1868)  saw  some  more  promo- 
tions in  the  Low-Church  interest.  Dr.  Tait  was 
translated  to  the  see  of  Canterbury  on  the  decease 
of  Archbishop  Longley  ;  and  was  succeeded  in 
that  of  London  by  Dr.  Jackson  of  Lincoln ;  who, 
while  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  had  scattered  a  congrega- 
tion gathered  from  among  Dissenters  and  heretics, 
telhng  the  priest  whom  he  was  inhibiting  that  they 
must  go  where  they  had  come  from  at  first  rather 
than  be  tolerated  in  some  points  of  Catholic  ritual. 
Canon  Champneys,  a  member  of  the  "Church 
Association  "  at  its  original  formation,  was  made 
Dean  of  Lichfield.     Another  influential  member  of 

THE    "GREAT    AND    GOOD"    DEAN.  251 

the  Association  was  sent  to  the  Deanery  of  Eipon. 
This  was  the  Eev.  Hugh  M'Neile,  D.D.,  Vicar  of 
St.  Paul's,  Liverpool,  and  Canon  of  Chester.  His 
appointment  gave  occasion  for  the  following  epi- 
gram in  the  Church  Times  : — 

"  High  in  the  scale  thy  Deans,  0  Eipon,  stand  ! 
High  in  the  scale  as  any  in  the  land  ! 
Thy  last  was  Goode,  and  now  propitious  fate 
Sends  thee  a  Dean  who  is  both  good  and  great." 

In  explanation  of  which  it  is  to  be  observed  that 
while  Dr.  M'Neile  was  still  at  Liverpool,  the  Editor 
of  the  Church  Times  received  one  day  a  letter  about 
some  matter  of  ecclesiastical  patronage,  and  in 
which  the  writer  spoke  of  Dr.  M'Neile  as  "  a  great 
and  good  man."  The  letter  was  anonymous,  but 
the  Editor  (who  had  seen  Dr.  M'Neile's  hand- 
writing before)  thought  that  he  recognised  in  it 
the  hand  of  the  rev.  Doctor  himself,  and  said  so 
in  print.  Dr.  M'Neile's  friends  were  very  indig- 
nant at  the  imputation  ;  but  the  Editor  did  not 
retract  the  avowal  of  his  belief;  and  the  Doctor 
himself  preserved  a  strict  silence  on  the  matter  ; 
until  at  a  public  meeting  some  allusion  to  the 
matter  was  made  by  one  of  the  speakers,  whereof 
the  Doctor  could  not  avoid  taking  some  notice, 
and  he  thereupon  got  up  and  acknowledged  hav- 
ing written  the  letter.  It  is  characteristic  of  the 
Low-Church  party  that  this  acknowledgment  was 
received  with  cheers.  A  propos  of  the  Doctor's 
advancement,  it  might  have  been  thought  that  a 
man  who  could  deliberately  write  himself  down 
as  "  great  and  good  "  was  not  exactly  the  man  to 
be  preferred  above  others  in  the  way  of  promotion, 


especially  promotion  in  the  Church  ;  considering 
the  words  in  the  Gospel,  "  Whosoever  exalteth 
himself  shall  be  abased."  Mr.  Disraeli,  however, 
thought  otherwise,  and  Dr.  M'Neile  became  Dean 
of  Eipon  :  retaining  the  nickname  of  "  great  and 
good  "  to  the  last. 

We  must  now  revert  to  the  j)ersecution  of  Mr. 
Mackonochie.  The  "  Church  Association  "  were 
not  well  pleased  either  at  having  the  Eucharistic 
lights  pronounced  legal,  or  that  a  man  should  be 
ruled  as  within  the  law  if  he  knelt  down  at  the  time 
of  consecration  ;  and  therefore  they  appealed  from 
the  judgment  of  Sir  Eobert  Phillimore  to  the  Judi- 
cial Committee  of  Privy  Council.  On  the  ITth  and 
following  days  of  November  in  this  same  year  (1868) 
the  case  was  heard  ;  and  on  the  23rd  of  December, 
two  days  before  Christmas  Day,  Earl  Cairns,  Lord 
High  Chancellor,  delivered  judgment.  With  regard 
to  this  there  are  certain  facts  which  an  impartial 
historian  cannot  pass  over  in  silence.  The  Earl  of 
Derby  had  resigned  the  office  of  Premier  in  the 
early  part  of  the  year,  and  had  been  succeeded  by 
Mr.  Disraeli  (afterwards  Earl  of  Beaconsfield) ;  and 
in  November  there  occurred  a  general  election. 
The  Ministry,  says  Mr.  J.  D.  Chambers,  Eecorder 
of  Salisbury,  "  had  chosen  to  raise  an  ultra-Protes- 
tant ciy.  It  soon  became  apparent  that  this  watch- 
word would  fail,  and  that  the  Administration  was 
doomed  to  fall.  In  this  state  of  things,  the  appeal 
in  the  St.  Alban's  case  was  advanced,  out  of  its 
turn,  from  the  bottom  of  a  long  list  to  the  head  of 
the  same  ;  and  although  in  the  ordinary  course  it 


could  not  have  been  taken  till  late  in  1869,  it  was 
forced  to  a  hearing  first."  *  It  behoved  the  Pres- 
byterian Lord  Chancellor  to  select  members  of  the 
Privy  Council  to  try  it ;  and  when  the  selection 
had  been  made,  the  list  stood  thus  : — Earl  Cairns, 
Lord  Chelmsford,  Lord  Westbury,  Sir  William 
Erie,  Sir  J.  W.  Colville,  and  the  Archbishop  of 
York  (Dr.  Thomson).  The  remark  was  thus  pro- 
voked that  the  list  included  "  a  Presbyterian,  an 
ex-representative  of  the  Orange  town  of  Belfast,  a 
partisan  archbishop,  a  lay  Low-Churchman,  and  a 
theologian  [Lord  Westbury]  who  talks  about  '  the 
inferior  Persons  of  the  Trinity.' "  Here  was  a 
court  to  adjudicate  upon  the  ritual  of  the  Church 
of  England,  and  to  review  a  judgment  pronounced 
by  so  learned  an  ecclesiastical  judge  as  Sir  Eobert 
Phillimore  ! 

The  judgment  on  the  appeal  was  delivered 
December  28,  1868.  It  proceeded  upon  the  as- 
sumption that  the  rubrics  of  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer  were  exhaustive,  and  to  be  regarded  as  for- 
bidding everything  which  they  did  not  expressly 
enjoin.  Mr.  Mackonochie  was  condemned  on  all 
the  points  ;  and  was,  moreover,  saddled  with  all  the 
costs,  although  four  out  of  six  points  had  been  de- 
cided in  his  favour  by  the  court  below,  and  the 
nominal  promoter  of  the  suit  was  not  legally  a 
parishioner — which  last  consideration  had,  in  the 
suit  of  Liddell  v.  Beal,  led  the  Judicial  Committee 
in  1860  to  decide  differently.    It  was  no  new  tliino-, 

*  strictures  on  the  Judgment  of  tJie  Court  of  Ap2)eal  in  the 
Case  of  Martin  v.  Mackonochie,  cited  in  The  Church  in  Bald w hi' s 
Gardens,  p.  31. 

254  MR.  mackonochie's  obedience. 

however,  for  the  Judicial  Committee  to  decide  in 
opposition  to  precedent  and  former  decisions. 

The  judgment  was  confirmed  January  14,  1869, 
and  on  the  19th  of  the  same  month  a  monition  was 
issued  from  her  Majesty's  Court  of  Appeal  order- 
ing Mr.  Mackonochie  to  govern  himself  accordingly. 
With  this  monition  he  complied  ;  ceasing  to  burn 
altar-lights  at  a  celebration,  ceasing  to  elevate  the 
paten  and  chalice  above  his  head,  and  ceasing  to 
kneel  in  the  interval  between  the  consecration  of 
the  two  several  kinds.  He  continued,  however, 
to  burn  lights  at  Mattins,  and  instead  of  kneeling 
in  time  of  consecration  he  genuflected ;  and  this 
gave  occasion  to  Mr.  Martin,  acting  as  agent  of  the 
"  Church  Association,"  to  come  before  the  Privy 
Council  with  the  information  that  Mi\  Mackonochie 
had  disobeyed  their  monition.  The  Privy  Council 
ruled  that  to  bend  the  knee  was  kneeling,  in  the 
eye  of  the  law,  even  though  the  knee  might  not 
touch  the  ground,  and  condemned  Mr.  Mackonochie 
accordingly  ;  and  although  acquitting  him  on  each 
of  Mr.  Martin's  other  two  charges,  they  nevertheless 
ordered  him  again  to  pay  all  the  costs. 

Ten  days  after  the  delivery  of  this  supplemental 
judgment  (so  to  call  it),  spies  were  sent  by  the 
"  Church  Association  "  to  St.  Alljan's  Church  ;  and 
they  continued  to  attend  the  church  on  various 
Sundays  in  December  1869,  and  in  the  following 
January  and  February.  Had  the  pious  members 
of  the  Association  Council  been  asked  individually 
whether  they  deemed  it  generally  right  to  go  to 
church  for  the  purpose  of  looking  about,  they 
would  probably  have  said  "No."     The  Christian 

PAID    SPIES.  255 

•Observer  had  expressed  the  opinion  in  1838  that 
*'  persons  in  church  ought  to  be  employed  in 
worshipping  God,  and  not  in  noting  the  gestures 
of  the  priest."  *  Now,  however,  that  the  prosecu- 
tion of  a  Eituahst  was  to  be  set  forward,  all  such 
principles  were  put  out  of  sight ;  and  an  associa- 
tion formed  for  the  purpose  of  promoting  spiritual 
religion  arranged  that  on  recurrences  of  that  Day 
whereof  Dr.  Watts  had  taua'ht  children  to  sinsf — 


"  To-day  with  pleasure  Christians  meet 
To  pray  and  hear  Thy  word," 

certain  persons  should  attend  solemn  services  at 
St.  Alban's  Church,  not  for  purposes  of  prayer,  or 
of  receiving  Christian  instruction,  but  solely  that 
they  might  be  able  to  make,  for  hire,  affidavits 
that  the  officiating  clergy  had  done  or  not  done 
such  and  such  things. 

On  the  26th  of  March,  1870,  the  Judicial  Com- 
mittee, consisting  of  the  Lord  Chancellor  (Lord 
Hatherley),  the  Archbishop  of  York  (Dr.  Thomson), 
and  Lord  Chelmsford,  sat  to  hear  what  these  per- 
sons had  to  say.  Their  affidavits  were  brought  up  ; 
and  affidavits  of  other  persons  as  well.  What  was 
the  evidence  ?  Had  the  elements  been  elevated 
above  the  head  ?  The  three  hired  spies  swore  that 
they  had  ;  three  clergymen  and  the  two  church- 
wardens, on  the  other  hand,  swore  that  they  had 
not.  Had  the  defendant  knelt  in  the  course  of  the 
prayer  of  consecration  ?  The  hired  spies  said 
"  Yes  ;  "  Mr.  Mackonochie  said  "  No,"  and  he  was 
corroborated  by  three  clergymen,  a  barrister,  and 

*  Christian  Observer  for  183B,  p.  177. 


a  solicitor.  Judgment  was  given  by  Lord  Chelms- 
ford towards  the  end  of  1870.  The  court  found 
that  kneeling  as  alleged  was  not  proved,  but  that 
Mr.  Mackonochie  had  sanctioned  elevation :  the 
Judges  thus  accepting  the  evidence  of  the  hired 
spies,  and  rejecting  the  contradictory  evidence  of 
the  clergymen  and  the  lawyers.  This  too,  we  be- 
lieve, was  the  occasion  on  which  the  court  was 
obliged  to  acknowledo^e  that  the  elevation  con- 
demned  had  been  only  an  elevation  of  the  rim  of 
the  cup,  and  that  even  that  had  been  done  by  the 
curate  "  unintentionally  and  unconsciously."  The 
court  also  found  Mr.  Mackonochie  guilty  of  sanc- 
tioning prostration — an  offence  with  which  he  had 
not  been  charged  in  the  Articles.  For  the  court 
held  that  bowing  was,  in  the  eye  of  the  law,  a  kind 
of  kneeling  ;  and  in  the  present  case,  said  Lord 
Chelmsford,  it  was  "  not  a  mere  bow,  but  a  humble 
prostration  of  the  body  in  reverence  and  adoration," 
thus  implying  that  it  was  the  humility,  the  reverence, 
and  the  adoration  which  made  Mr.  Mackonochie's 
act,  otherwise  allowable,  to  be  illegal  and  worthy  of 
punishment.  And  the  sentence  was  that  Mr.  Mac- 
konochie should  be  suspended  for  three  months. 

To  this  judgment  Mr.  Mackonochie  deemed  it  his 
duty  to  submit,  and  submitted  accordingly.  The 
bill  of  costs  (which  he  had  to  pay)  included  the  fol- 
lowing items,  among  many  others  of  a  like  kind : — 

"  July,  1869.  £      s.    d. 

Attending  Mr.  Pond  :  instracting  him  to  attend 

St.  Alban's  on  Sunday,  July  11th  .         .  0     C  8 

Taking  his  statement  and  fair  copy    .         .         .  0  18  4 

Paid  him  for  his  attendance        .         .         .         ,  2     2  0 


Attending  Mr.  Pond  ;  instructing  him  to  attend  £  s.    d. 
the  early  Communion  on  July  12th  {i.e.  the 

next  day,  Monday)  and  four  following  days    .  0  6     8 

Taking  his  statement  and  fair  copy    .         .         .  0  18     4 

Paid  him  for  his  attendance        .         .         .         .  5  5     0 


Immoral  Period,  contmued.     Commencement  of  the  Eocl'.     Pro- 
prietary Chapels.     Persecution  of  the  Eev.  John  Purchas. 

"  They  build  up  Zion  with  blood,  and  Jerusalem  with  iniquity.' ' 
— MiCAH  iii.  10. 

We  must  now,  however,  turn  our  eyes  away  from 
St.  Alban's,  Holborn,  to  see  what  had  been  doing 
by  the  Low-Church  party  in  other  parts  of  London 
and  in  the  country. 

Li  the  early  part  of  the  year  1868  was  started 
the  Rock  newspaper,  from  the  pubhshing-office  of 
Messrs.  CoUingridge.  It  was  designated  "  a  Church 
of  England  family  newspaper,  on  sound  National 
principles  ; "  it  received  the  support  of  many  Low- 
Church  leaders,  and  it  came  out  every  Tuesday 
and  Friday  at  the  price  of  one  penny.  It  soon 
earned  for  itself  the  sobriquet  of  "The  Penny 
Punch,"  so  vastly  amusing  was  it.  This  was  by 
reason  of  the  ignorance,  stupidity,  and  fanaticism 
which  it  displayed  in  dealing  with  religious  mat- 
ters ;  for  it  became  a  quasi-organ  of  the  "  Church 
Association,"  and  showed  itself  in  every  way 
worthy  of  its  connexion  with  that  society.  Of 
the  amount  of  churchmanship  possessed  by  the 
Editor  an  indication  was  given  in  a  remark  which 
II.  18 


appeared   in   one   number,    where,  criticising  ad- 
versely some  Pdtualistic  precept  or  recommendation, 
it  took  for  granted  that  the  words  "  0  come,  let  us 
worship  and  fall  down,  and  kneel  before  the  Lord 
our  Maker  "  occurred  in  the  Magnificat,  and  that 
presently,  after  hearing  them  or  joining  in  them, 
the  cono-re^ation  seated  themselves  to  hear  a  Lesson 
read,  and  that  Lesson  the  First.     Dr.  Pusey  men- 
tioned  his  having   been   assured   by  a   Eomanist 
correspondent  that  some  of   the  bitterest  articles 
in  two  newspapers  (the  Rock,  apparently,  one,  and 
the  Daily  Telegraph  the  other)  had  been  written  by 
Eomanists  in  the  Eomanist  interest,  for  the  purpose 
of  making  the  Church  of  England  too  hot  for  the 
Eitualists.     And  certainly  that  was  not  the  only 
way  in  which  the  new  ultra-Low-Church  paper  laid 
itself  open  to  the  suspicion  of  having  been   tam- 
pered with  by  Eomanists.     A  powerful  anti-Papal 
article  appeared  in  the    Church  Quarterly  Review 
for  1878.     The  Rock,  which  had  been  always  op- 
posed to  that  periodical,  and  eager  to   represent 
it  as  secretly  Eomanist,  said  nothing  at  all  about 
this  article,  although  the  first  and  longest  in  the 
number,  while  noticing,  and  commenting  upon  all 
or  almost  all  of  the  rest.     This  was  pointed  out 
by  a  correspondent  of  the  Church  Times  ;    and  in 
a  reply  the  Editor  of  the  Rock  said  that   it  had 
"  never  ceased  to  recommend  Rome  as  the  proper 
port  for  which  the  Puseyite  crew  ought  to  steer 
their  rickety  bark.     Submission   to   Eome  icould 
not   add   to    their   heresy,  while  it  would   remove 
their   inconsistency.      At    the  same  time  we   are 
well  aware  that  sucli  is  not  the  object  of  the  ivire- 


pullers  of  the  party.  What  the  Puseyites  really 
desire — so  old  Stanley  Faber  said  nigh  forty  years 
ago — is  not  submission  to  Eome,  hut  full  Catholic 
communion  with  her.""  On  which  the  Church  Times' 
correspondent,  Mr.  P.  H.  Vivian,  remarked,  "  As 
submission  to  Eome  now  means  the  acceptance 
of  the  Vatican  decrees  on  the  supremacy  and  in- 
fallibility of  the  Pope,  it  follows  that  the  Rock 
does  not  think  these  doctrines  heretical,  but  either 
absolutely  unimportant,  or  else  true,  and,  if  true. 
Divine."  And  as  to  the  Rock's  confession  that  the 
Eitualist  leaders  did  not  wish  at  all  to  send  anyone 
over  to  Eome,  that  was  in  effect,  he  pointed  out,  an 
acknowledgment  that  nine-tenths  of  the  attacks  in  its 
own  columns  upon  the  Eitualists  were  consciously 
mendacious.  Moreover,  in  his  issue  for  the  first 
week  in  1878  the  Editor  endorsed  the  proposal  of 
a  correspondent  that  the  consecration  of  Arch- 
bishop Parker  should  be  attacked  with  a  view  to 
driving  over  to  Eome  those  Anglican  Churchmen 
who  believed  the  doctrine  of  Apostolic  Succession. 
Still,  if  the  Rock  had  desired  to  justify  itself, 
it  had  the  plea  of  the  most  profound  stupidity  ; 
for  in  one  number  it  actually  printed  a  letter  (evi- 
dently a  hoax)  in  which  a  great  deal  of  varied 
learning  was  brought  up — Sanscrit,  Hebrew,  Greek, 
Gaelic,  and  Hindoostanee — to  prove  that  pet  meant 
a  harlot,  and  EUS  red ;  and  that  thus  the  true 
meaning  of  tu  es  petrus  (Thou  art  PeterJ  was  Thou 
art  a  red  harlot. 

Another  hoax  appeared  later,  and  (we  behevej 
not  for  the  first  time  ;  the  following  being  printed 
in  a  letter  purporting  to  come  from  "  A  Despairing 

260  STUPIDITY    OF    THE    ROCK. 

Protestant :  " — "  We  all  know  how  ridiculously 
palms  are  used  in  some  cliurclies  on  Palm  Sunday. 
But  surely  when  the  Vicar  of  a  Eitualistic  church 
(as  was  actually  done  in  my  own  parish)  preaches 
with  palms  in  his  hands,  and  a  crown  on  his  head, 
Eitualistic  priest-worship  has  attained  its  zenith. 
How  long  is  this  to  be  celebrated  by  truth-loving 
Englishmen  ?  "* 

And,  indeed,  the  new  paper  carried  a  statement 
of  its  stupidity  on  its  very  forefront.  The  heading 
included  an  engraving  which  represented  a  Bible 
open  at  the  words  "  Their  rock  is  not  as  our  Eock, 
even  our  enemies  themselves  being  judges. "f  Of 
course,  if  the  promoters  of  the  Rock  had  not  been 
over  head  and  ears  in  stupidity,  they  would  have 
seen  that  the  citing  that  text  in  such  a  connexion 
could  only  mean  that  the  Rock  newspaper  was 
their  god.  It  is  a  pity  that  they  did  not  know 
their  Bibles  better  ;  else  they  might  have  remarked 
that  text  in  Jeremiah  which  sa3^s,  "  Is  not  My  word 
like  as  a  fire  ?  saith  the  Lord  ;  and  like  a  hammer 
that  breaketh  the  Eock  in  pieces  ?  ";|; 

A  portion  of  the  paper  was  devoted  for  some 
time  to  what  the  Editor  called  "  Eomish  and 
Eitualistic  gleanings."  This,  however,  had  to  be 
discontinued  ;  for  it  was  found  that  the  informa- 
tion thus  brought  into  Low-Church  families  worked 
unsatisfactorily  for  Low-Church  interests. 

We  must  now,  however,  give  some  account  of  the 
second  act  (or  rather,  set  of  acts)  of  persecution  in 
which  the  "  Church  Association  "  was  eng-afyed. 

*  Boch,  March  22,  1883,  p.  186.  t  Deut.  xxxii.  31. 

t  Jer.  xxiii.  29. 


One  of  the  abuses  wliicli  had  grown  up  in  the 
Church  of  England  since  the  Eeformation  was  that 
of  proprietary  chapels.  Down  to  a  very  late  period 
a  new  church  could  not  be  consecrated  without  a 
special  Act  of  Parliament ;  and  this,  coupled  in 
some  cases  with  a  dislike  on  the  part  of  certain  indi- 
viduals for  the  ministrations  done  at  their  parish 
church,  and  in  other  cases,  it  may  without  much 
uncharitableness  be  surmised,  a  desire  to  make 
money  out  of  the  religion  of  the  neighbourhood, 
occasioned  the  building  of  numerous  proprietary 
chapels.  And  in  1882  or  thereabouts  almost  the 
only  places  in  London  where  Low-Church  doctrines 
were  taught  were  such  chapels.  Such  was  the 
chajDel  belonging  to  the  Lock  Hospital ;  such  were 
Long  Acre  Chapel,  Bentinck  Chapel,  Wheler  Chapel, 
Welbeck  Chapel,  and  St.  John's,  Bedford  Eow. 

The  chapel  was  ordinarily  built  to  suit  the 
requirements  of  those  who  wished  to  hear  Mattins 
and  Evensong  read,  and  sermons  preached,  and 
to  receive  Holy  Communion  now  and  then,  and 
nothing  more.  Hence  it  commonly  formed  a  paral- 
lelogram, with  the  altar  at  one  end,  which  might 
be  either  east,  west,  north,  or  south  ;  a  lofty  erec- 
tion was  commonly  put  in  front  of  the  altar,  and 
this  erection  was  usually  in  three  stages  :  one  for 
the  clerk,  raised  a  step  above  the  chapel-iioor  ;  one 
behind  it  for  the  reader  (as  the  junior  officiant 
was  termed),  at  a  still  higher  altitude ;  and  the 
highest  and  hindermost  of  all  for  the  preacher. 
Wags  termed  this  triple  stage  a  three-decker  ;  it 
commanded  not  only  the  floor  of  the  chapel,  but 
one  or  more  galleries,  usually  three,  at  the  further 

262  ST.  James's  chapel,  Brighton. 

end  and  on  either  side ;  and  in  that  at  the 
further  end  was  usually  an  organ,  if  that  instru- 
ment, with  a  gallery  for  singers,  did  not  occupy 
an  exalted  position  behind  the  Holy  Table,  as  in 
Quebec  Chapel. 

Underneath  the  chapel  were  in  many  cases 
wine-vaults.  The  chapel  itself  was  let  to  a  clergy- 
man on  lease ;  and  that  clergyman's  object  was 
then  to  draw  a  congregation  by  the  fame  of  his 
preaching,  and  so,  through  the  medium  of  pew- 
rents,  to  make  the  concern  pay.  Or  it  might 
belong  to  a  body  of  trustees,  or  to  a  single  indivi- 
dual, who  appointed  the  clergyman  on  such  terms 
as  might  be  agreed  upon.  The  clergyman  then 
applied  to  the  bishop  of  the  diocese  for  a  licence 
to  officiate  in  the  building ;  and,  unless  the  incum- 
bent of  the  parish  objected,  as  was  very  rarely  the 
case,  the  licence  was  not  withheld,  though  the 
buildino^  still  remained  unconsecrated. 

St.  James's,  Brighton,  was  one  of  these  chapels  : 
and,  being  one  day  for  sale,  was  bought  by  the 
Eev.  John  Purchas.  This  clergyman  had  already 
distinguished  himself  in  ecclesiastical  literature  by 
a  work  which  he  entitled  Directorium  Anglicanum, 
and  in  which  he  sought  to  show  how  far,  in  the 
multiplication  of  ornaments  and  ceremonies,  a 
clergyman  might  go  without  violating  the  law  of 
the  Church  of  England.  Having  purchased  the 
chapel,  he  commenced  officiating  in  it ;  and  before 
he  had  done  so  very  long,  he  had  carried  out  his 
views  as  to  Anglican  ritual,  if  not  quite  as  far 
as  he  had  indicated  in  the  Directorium,  yet,  at  all 
events,  quite  far  enough  to  strike  with  horror  any 


Low-Churchman  who  might  find  himself  unawares 
within  St.  James's  Chapel. 

We  use  this  last  expression  of  set  purpose  ;  for 
nobody  had  any  necessary  business  inside  the 
chapel  except  Mr.  Purchas  himself  and  those 
whom  he  might  have  engaged  to  serve  or  assist 
him  in  the  conduct  of  its  services.  The  chapel 
was  Mr.  Purchas's  own  private  property,  and  if  he 
chose  to  lock  up  the  doors  from  one  year's  end  to 
another,  or  to  turn  it  into  a  concert-room,  or  to 
pull  it  down  and  build  a  dwelling-house  on  its  site, 
no  one  had  any  legal  or  moral  grievance.  And 
this  consideration  sets  in  its  proper  light  the  con- 
duct of  the  "  Church  Association,"  the  local  branch 
whereof  had  for  its  chairman  the  Eev.  Edmund 
Clay,  Incumbent  of  St.  Margaret's.  Some  infor- 
mation as  to  this  gentleman's  ministerial  zeal  and 
rubrical  conformity  may  be  gained  by  those  who 
may  care  to  read  his  evidence  given  before  the 
Eoyal  Commission  on  Eitual  on  the  4th  of  July, 
1867.  One  of  his  churchwardens  was  a  colonel  in 
the  army,  Charles  James  Elphinstone,  of  No.  10 
Montpellier  Crescent ;  and  this  gallant  gentleman, 
acting  on  behalf  of  the  "  Church  Association,"  got 
up  an  accusation  against  Mr.  Purchas ;  in  conse- 
quence of  which,  when  in  the  Court  of  Arches  Dr. 
Tristram  applied  for  the  acceptance,  by  the  Dean 
of  Arches,  of  Letters  of  Eequest  from  the  Diocesan 
Court,  Sir  Eobert  Phillimore  assented.  This  was 
on  the  15th  of  July,  1869.  The  charges  against 
Mr.  Purchas  were  thirty-three  in  number  ;  some 
of  them  of  the  most  trivial  character ;  and  every 
act  of  Mr.  Purchas's  whereof  complaint  was  made 


was  divided  as  much  as  possible,  so  as  so  make  the 
number  of  charges  as  large  as  possible.  They 
were  these : — 

1.  A  procession  round  the  chapel. 

2.  Use  of  a  crucifix. 

3.  Having  on  the  Holy  Table  a  large  metal 

4.  Bowing  to  the  crucifix. 

5.  Placing  flowers  on  the  Holy  Table. 

6.  Having  lighted  candles  on  the  Table. 

7.  Use  of  incense. 

8.  Eubbing  a  black  powder  on  members  of  the 
congregation.  (This  was  probably  the  putting 
ashes  on  their  heads  on  Ash- Wednesday.) 

9.  Sprinkling  holy-water  on  candles,  the  candles 
to  be  borne  by  members  of  the  congregation. 

10.  Mixing  water  with  wine  for  the  Commu- 

11.  Administering  the  same  to  the  communi- 

12.  Elevating  the  elements. 

13.  "  The  same  specified."  (What  this  meant 
we  do  not  know.) 

14.  Use  of  wafer-bread. 

15.  Using  a  bell  at  the  time  of  consecration  and 

16.  Introduction  of  "  the  Agnus  "  in  the  service 
when  not  authorised. 

17.  Elevating  the  offertory-alms,  and,  after 
placing  them  for  a  moment  on  the  Holy  Table, 
handing  them  to  an  acolyte  to  be  placed  on  the 

18.  Suffering  the  Holy  Table  to  be,    on  Good 


Friday,   without  any  decent  covering.     (That  is, 
probably,  without  any  covering  at  aU.) 

19.  Allowing  holy-water  to  be  placed  in  the 

20.  Sprinkling  hoty-water  on  palm-branches. 

21.  Pausing  at  a  certain  part  of  the  Prayer  for 
the  whole  State  of  Christ's  Church. 

22.  Giving  notice  on  a  certain  Sunday,  after 
the  Sermon,  that  there  would  be  on  such  a  day  a 
mortuary  celebration  for  the  repose  of  a  Sister. 

23.  Using  (we  suppose,  at  Christmas)  a  model- 
figure  of  the  infant  Saviour,  and  on  Whitsun  Day 
a  figure  of  a  dove. 

24.  Giving  notice  of  high  celebrations  of  the 
Holy  Eucharist. 

25.  Making  the  sign  of  the  cross  when  about  to 
mix  the  chalice. 

26.  Kissing  the  book  from  which  the  Gospel  was 
read  or  to  be  read. 

27.  "Using  a  ceremony  in  admitting  a  new 
acolyte  or  choir-boy." 

28.  Wearing  a  cope. 

29.  Sanctioning  the  wearing  of  copes  by  other 
clergymen  at  Evening  Service. 

30.  Using  a  chasuble  in  the  Communion-Service. 

31.  Sanctioning  the  wearing  of  other  vestments 
(probably  tunicles  or  dalmatics)  by  other  clergy- 

32.  Wearing  a  coloured  stole. 

33.  "  Suifering  other  clergymen  to  use  vestments 
and  to  conduct  the  services  not  in  a  manner  ap- 
pointed by  the  laws  ecclesiastical." 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  Colonel  Elphinstone 


did  not  appear  to  have  ever  attended  Mr.  Pur- 
clias's  chapel.  The  case  was  heard  in  the  Court 
of  Arches  on  the  19th  of  JSTovember,  1869.  Mr. 
Purchas  did  not  appear.  The  articles  against  him 
now  numbered  forty-four,  and  occupied  sixteen  folio 
pages  of  j)rint.  One  of  the  articles  had  charged 
him  with  having  "  made  a  considerable,  unneces- 
sary, and  unusual  pause  of  about  half  a  minute 
after  pronouncing  the  words  '  departed  this  life  in 
Thy  faith  and  fear.'  "  The  Dean  of  Arches  ordered 
this  article  to  be  struck  out.  Another  had  refer- 
ence to  the  use  of  ornaments  and  vestments  "  such 
[said  the  accuser]  as  are  in  that  behalf  prescribed 
by  the  rubrics  and  general  directions  contained  in 
a  certain  work,  entitled  The  Services  of  the  Church, 
with  Rubrical  Directions  according  to  the  use  of  the 
illustrious  Church  of  Sarum,  together  with  the  Hymns, 
Introits,  Graduals,  Tracts,  and  Sequences  of  the  same 
Churchr  This  also  the  Dean  of  Arches  ordered  to 
be  struck  out.  Two  other  charges  on  important 
points  of  ritual  were  brought  now  for  the  first  time 
against  a  Eitualistic  clergyman ;  though  (as  we 
shall  see)  they  formed  part  of  the  enemy's  regular 
programme  in  subsequent  prosecutions,  where  the 
case  admitted :  those  charges  being,  the  use  of 
wafer-bread,  and  the  use  of  the  Eucharistic  vest- 
ments. In  the  Mackonochie  case  the  "  Church 
Association  "  had  not  dared  to  prosecute  the  priest 
for  wearincf  the  Eucharistic  vestments  or  for  using 
wafer-bread,  Dr.  Archibald  Stephens  having  ad- 
vised them  that  in  both  these  matters  Mr.  Macko- 
nochie was  sure  to  be  pronounced  within  the  law 
And  with  regard  to  the  Eucharistic  vestments  more 


especially,  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council 
had  decided,  in  the  case  of  Liddell  v.  Westerton, 
that  the  Ornaments'  Eubric  (as  it  was  called),  taken 
in  its  plain  and  literal  sense,  was  the  law  of  the 
land ;  and  one  of-  the  members  of  the  Judicial 
Committee  had  said  privately,  with  reference  to 
thi^  decision,  as  we  remarked  once  before,  "We 
have  just  given  the  clergy  authority  to  wear  the 
Eucharistic  vestments  if  they  like  ;  it  is  to  be 
hoped  that  they  will  not  find  it  out."  *  Agreeably 
to  which,  the  "  Church  Association  "  had  said,  in 
a  circular  put  forth  in  the  spring  of  1867,  "So 
long  as  the  rubric  in  question  remains  in  the 
Prayer-book,  and  the  legal  sanction  above  referred 
to  continues  to  be  law,  every  clergyman  may  claim 
the  right  to  wear  the  vestments  and  use  the  other 
vessels  or  articles  which  were  in  use  by  the  autho- 
rity of  Parliament  in  the  second  year  of  Edward 
VI."  Now,  however,  there  seemed  some  chance 
of  getting  these  decisions  contradicted,  and  the 
"  Church  Association  "  accordingly  prosecuted  Mr. 
Purchas  for  acting  in  conformity  with  them. 

Judgment  was  given  by  Sir  Eobert  Phillimore 
on  the  ord  of  February,  1870. 

On  many  of  the  charges  the  court  decided  that 
Mr.  Purchas  had  transgressed  the  laws  ecclesiasti- 
cal ;  and  therefore  directed  a  monition  to  be  issued 
against  him  in  respect  of  the  practices  to  which 
those  charges  referred.  But  on  the  charges  con- 
tained in  five  of  the  articles  the  court  refused  to 
issue  a  monition :  thus  declaring  the  legality  of 
Mr.  Purchas's  practice  in  regard  thereof.     These 

*  See  above,  p.  103. 


charges  were,  the  use  of  the  mixed  chahce,  the 
standing  with  back  to  the  congregation  while 
saying  the  Consecration-prayer,  the  use  of  wafer- 
bread,  the  use  of  the  chasuble,  and  the  use  by 
assistant  clergy  of  albs,  dalmatics,  and  tunicles. 
The  charge  of  causing  holy-water  to  be  poured 
into  divers  receptacles  in  the  chapel  was  another 
on  which  no  monition  was  issued ;  the  reason  being 
that  the  fact  had  not  been  proved.  Mr.  Purchas 
was  condemned  in  the  costs  of  the  proceedings. 

Mr.  Purchas  had  not  appeared  before  the  court, 
and  he  did  not  appeal  against  the  judgment.  But 
as  the  learned  Dean  of  Arches  had  decided  several 
usages  to  be  legal  which  the  "  Church  Association  " 
did  not  like,  it  was  determined  by  the  Association 
to  appeal  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy 

Before,  however,  the  appeal  could  be  heard,  a 
little  difficulty  came  in  the  way.  Col.  Elphinstone, 
the  nominal  promoter  of  the  suit,  was  taken  ill ;  and 
after  expressing  his  regret  at  the  concern  he  had 
had  in  the  prosecution  of  Mr.  Purchas,  took  his 
departure  to  that  country  where  a  wise  man  says 
that  "  there  is  no  work,  nor  device,  nor  knowledge, 
nor  wisdom."  *  And  it  might  have  been  thought, 
by  those  not  behind  the  scenes,  that  the  persecu- 
tion of  Mr.  Purchas  for  doing  what  the  Ecclesi- 
astical Court  had  pronounced  legal  would  now 
cease.  It  was  not,  however,  so  to  be  :  the  real 
prosecutor  was  the  "  Church  Association  : "  and 
application  was  now  made  to  the  Privy  Council 
that,  Col.  Elphinstone  being  deceased,  the  name  of 

*  Ecclesiastes  ix.  10. 


another  member  of  the  Brighton  "  Church  Associa- 
tion" Council — a  Mr.  Henry  Hebbert — might  be 
substituted  for  his,  and  the  suit  proceed.     And  it 
is  to  be  observed  that  Mr.  Hebbert's  cause  was 
equally  disinterested  with  Col.  Elphinstone's  :  for 
neither  of  those  gentlemen  had  ever  attended  the 
chapel  so  as  to  be  aggrieved  at  the  proceedings 
whereof  they  complained.    The  Privy  Council,  how- 
ever, assented  to  the  prayer  of  the  Association; 
and  after  the  court  had  been  duly  packed  by  Lord 
Chancellor  Hatherley,  it  sat  to  hear  the  appeal :  the 
Committee  being  Lord  Hatherley,  the  Archbishop 
of  York  (Dr.  Thomson),  the  Bishop  of  London  (Dr. 
Jackson),  and  Lord  Chelmsford ;  which  last  noble 
and  learned  lord  was  the  same  who,  when  plain 
Sir  Frederic  Thesiger,  had  given  his   opinion  in 
peculiarly  strong  terms  in  favour  of  the  legality  of 
the  Eucharistic  vestments.    Mr.  Purchas,  as  before, 
did  not  appear.     Judgment  was  given  on  the  23rd 
of  February,  1871.     Mr.  Purchas  was  condemned 
on  all  points.     He  was  condemned  for  mixing  the 
chalice  privately,  in  the  sacristy,   before  service ; 
on  the  ground  that  such  a  practice  had  not  pre- 
vailed at  all  in  the  Christian   Church :    the  fact 
being  that  the  practice  in  question  had  been  in- 
variable  in    the   East   (except   in   the   Armenian 
Church)  for  fourteen  hundred  years  at  least,  and 
in  the  Church  of  England  also,   at  Low  Masses, 
according   to   the   use   of  Sarum.     He  was    con- 
demned for  consecrating  with  his  back  to  the  con- 
gregation, on  the  ground  that  in  the  rubric  the 
words  "  standing  before  the  Table  "  were  to  refer 
only  to  the  time  during  which  the  celebrant  was  to 


be  ordering  the  bread  and  wine.  He  was  con- 
demned for  the  use  of  wafer-bread,  on  the  ground 
that  in  the  rubric  the  words  "  it  shall  suffice " 
imply  that  nothing  else  is  to  be  allowed  :  and  that 
common  fine  wheaten  bread  cannot  be  made  in 
circular  pieces.  He  was  condemned  for  wearing 
the  Eucharistic  vestments,  because,  said  their 
Lordships,  "It  was  not  seriously  contended  that 
albs  and  chasubles  could,  in  any  reasonable  or 
practical  sense,  or  according  to  any  known  usage, 
be  worn,  or  be  meant  to  be  worn,  concurrently 
with  the  surplice : "  the  fact  being  that  this  very 
combination  is  expressly  prescribed,  under  certain 
circumstances,  by  the  Eoman  Missal,  and  the  old 
statutes  of  St.  Paul's  Cathedral.  The  only  thing 
for  which  Mr.  Purchas  was  not  condemned  was 
the  wearing  of  a  biretta :  that  not  having  been 

By  this  judgment  the  Privy  Council  contradicted 
judgments  previously  given  by  the  same  tribunal 
in  the  cases  of  Westerton  v.  Liddell  and  Martin  v. 
Mackonochie.  They  gave  such  a  force  to  the 
canons  as  would  be  repudiated  by  every  other 
court  of  justice.  A  construction  of  the  "  Orna- 
ments' Eubric"  which  had  been  held  by  every 
court  and  every  legal  authority,  save  only  by  Lord 
Cairns,  Lord  Justice  Mellish,  and  Sir  Eoundell 
Palmer,  they  declared  to  be  "  a  modern  one."  They 
relied  on  an  argument  from  usage  and  desuetude 
when  that  argument  was  not  only  contrary  to  his- 
torical fact,  but  could,  if  sound,  destroy  their  own 
conclusions ;  to  say  nothing  of  such  an  argument 
liavino-    been   rejected   by  the   same    court   in   a 


former  case.  They  quoted  autliorities  when  in 
their  favour,  and  abstained  from  even  recordinof 
the  same  authorities  when  against  them.  Cases 
occurring  in  the  period  from  1560  to  1627  and 
1636  were  cited  as  explaining  a  rubric  of  1662.* 

*  In  this  case  there  was  an  error  committed  in  printing  the 
judgment,  to  which  the  following  letters  refer : — 

"  Whitehall,  Feb.  1,  1882. 

"  My  Lord  Ai'chbishop, — I  find  on  comparing  the  report  of  the 

judgment  of  the  Privy  Council  on  the  appeal  of  '  Hebbert  v.  Purchas  ' 

in  Moore's  'Privy  Coimcil  Eeports  (New  Series),'  vol.  vii.  p,  550, 

with  the  original  draft  of  that  judgment,  which  is  in  this  office,  that 

a  typographical  error  occurs  in  the  passage,  stating  that  '  the  words 

of  Archdeacon,  afterwards  Bishop  Cosin  in  a.d.  1687,  express  the 

state  of  the  law.'      The  date  of  this  opinion  of  Archdeacon  Cosin 

should  be  1627,  and  it  is  so  stated  in  the  draft  of  the  judgment. — 

"  I  have  the  honour  to  be, 

"  Your  Grace's  most  obedient,  humble  servant, 

"  Henry  Reeve,  Registrar  P.C. 
"  The  Lord  Archbishop  of  York." 

The  following  was  Dr.  Littledale's  reply  in  the  Times  : — 

"  Sir, — There  is  one  small  detail  in  reference  to  the  eiTor  in  the 
Piurchas  Judgment  of  the  year  1687  instead  of  1627  as  the  date  of 
Cosin's  Visitation  Articles,  which  the  Archbishop  of  York  has 
omitted  to  mention  in  his  letter  in  the  Times  of  to-day.  The 
Articles  in  question  are  cited  in  the  judgment  as  settling  the  legal 
interpretation  of  the  words  '  standing  before  the  table  '  in  the 
rubric  of  the  Prayer  of  Consecration  in  the  Communion  Office,  and 
as  proving  that  they  do  not  mean  standing  in  front,  facing  east- 
wards, because  Cosui  plainly  implies  that  the  north  side  was  the 
legal  position  except  during  the  Gospel  and  the  administration  of 

the  Sacrament.    But  this  rubric  did  not  so  much  as  exist  in  1661 

34  years  later  than  Cosin's  Articles  ;  and  the  rubric  that  he  was 
glossing  was  that  of  1552-1604 — '  Then  the  Priest,  standing  up, 
shall  say  as  foUoweth.'  Here  there  is  no  word  of  '  before  the 
table,'  and  of  course  the  officiant  was  bound  to  remain  where  a 
former  rubric  had  put  him.  The  Piu-chas  Judges  consequently 
used  for  thek  purpose  a  document  which  had  absolutely  no  bearing 
whatever  on  the  point  at  issue,  which  could  not  have  so  much  as 
arisen  until  34  years  later  than  this  piece  of  evidence.  The  date 
1687,  had  it  been  the  true  one,  would  have  been  of  the  utmost 
value  to  their   Lordships,  as  then  they  would  have  had  a  con- 


And  their  Lordships  were  not  ashamed  to  inter- 
polate the  word  "  only  "  after  the  word  "  surplice," 
both  in  citing  the  Advertisements  of  1564,  and  in 
citing  the  Canons  of  1603,  with  a  view  to  bolster- 
ing up  their  lawless  decision. 

On  the  1st  of  March  the  "  Church  Association  " 
held  its  sixth  annual  meeting ;  and  great  was  the 
joy  expressed  thereat  upon  the  decision  of  the 
Privy  Council.  Mr.  Purchas  had  been  condemned, 
it  mattered  not  how,  or  on  what  law. 

In  the  course  of  the  same  spring  Mr.  Purchas 
had,  most  unexpectedly  to  himself,  an  offer  of  pe- 
cuniary assistance  from  a  private  source  :  in  con- 
sequence of  which  he  petitioned  the  Queen  for  a 
re-hearing  of  the  case.  His  petition  was  referred 
to  the  Judicial  Committee  and  brought  on  the 
26th  of  April  before  the  court ;  which  now  con- 
sisted of  the  Lord  Chancellor  (Lord  Hatherley), 
Lords  Chelmsford,  Westbury,  and  Cairns  ;  Sir  James 
Colville,  Lords  Justices  James  and  Mellish ;  the 
Archbishop  of  York  (Dr.  Thomson),  and  the  Bishop 
of  London  (Dr.  Jackson).  After  hearing  the  argu- 
ments, their  Lordships  decided  that,  considering 
the  "  grave  public  mischief  that  might  arise  from 
any  doubt  being  thrown  on  the  finality  of  the 
decisions  of  the  Committee,"  "  expediency  required 
that  the  prayer  of  the  petition  should  not  be  ac- 
ceded  to."     Not   unlike,  if  some   very  unparlia- 

temporaneous  exposition  of  the  disputed  rubric  by  the  very  man 
who  framed  it.  And  thus  they  got  credit  for  having  substituted  it 
for  one  w^hich  is  of  no  use  to  them.  The  moral  position  of  their 
Lordships  remains  much  the  same,  whichever  view  be  accepted. 

•'  9  lied  Lion-square,  W.C,  April  16." 

DECEASE    OF   MR.    PUKCHAS.  273 

mentary  language  is  permissible,  what  we  have 
heard  designated  as  the  school-boy's  Ninth  Com- 
mandment— "  Tell  a  lie  and  stick  to  it." 

The  Judicial  Committee  had  issued  a  monition 
to  Mr.  Purchas  ordering  him  to  desist  from  those 
practices  which  they  had  declared  illegal.  This 
monition  Mr.  Purchas  disregarded :  for  which  disre- 
gard information  was  duly  laid  against  him  before 
their  Lordships,  with  the  result  of  a  fresh  sentence, 
though  not  of  a  fresh  trial.  In  this  the  Vrivj 
Council  followed  a  precedent  given  by  themselves 
some  two  years  before.  The  principle  was  after- 
wards ruled  by  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench  to  be 
an  erroneous  one :  but  that  ruling  came  too  late 
for  any  benefit  to  Mr.  Purchas. 

Mr.  Purchas  had  been  condemned  in  costs.  The 
costs  of  the  proceedings  before  the  Court  of  Arches 
had  been  £1,387  ;  and  of  the  proceedings  before 
the  Judicial  Committee,  £2,510.  Of  these  not  a 
single  farthing  was  ever  received  by  the  promoter 
of  the  suit,*  Mr.  Purchas's  pecuniary  means  beino- 
apparently  exhausted.  Nor  was  it  long  possible 
even  to  dun  him ;  for  his  health  had  given  way 
under  the  worry  of  the  prosecution,  and  he  fol- 
lowed Col.  Elphinstone  out  of  the  world.  And 
St.  James's  Chapel  came  afterwards  f  to  be  num- 
bered, with  some  triumph,  at  a  "  Church-Associa- 
tion" meeting,  among  those  churches  which  the 
incumbents,  in  consequence  of  the  action  of  the 
Association,  had  quitted. 

*  These  particiilars  were  stated  by  the  Archbishop  of  York  in 
the  House  of  Lords,  in  the  debate  on  the  Pubhc  Worship  Regulation 
Bill,  May  11,  1874. 

t  At  the  Autiuun  Conference  in  1880. 

n.  19 

274.  BISHOP  sumner's 


Immoral  Period,  continued.  Prosecutions  of  the  Rev.  Hooker  Wis 
and  the  Rev.  W.  J.  E.  Bennett.  Lord  Shaftesbury's  Ecclesias- 
tical Courts  Reform  Bill.  Opposition  to  communicating  in  the 
Pahn.     Low-Church  Refusals  to  associate  with  Ritualists. 

"  How  long  shall  they  utter  and  speak  hard  things  ?  and  all  the 
workers  of  iniquity  boast  themselves?" — Psalm  xciv.  4  (Bible 

Along  with  the  persecution  of  Mr.  Purchas  there 
had  begun  the  persecution  of  another  priest,  though 
this  terminated  sooner.  In  July  1869  the  Low- 
Church  Bishop  of  Winchester  (Dr.  Charles  Eichard 
Sumner)  thought  it  necessary  to  attack  Eitualism 
in  his  diocese.  The  Eev.  Eichard  Hooker  Edward 
Wix,  Vicar  of  Swanmore  in  the  Isle  of  Wight, 
had  given  offence  to  a  meddlesome  Protestant  by 
his  manner  of  conducting  Divine  Service.  The 
offended  party,  who  lived  a  long  way  out  of  the 
parish,  and  proclaimed  himself  "  a  servant,  not  a 
paid  servant,  but  still  a  servant,  of  the  Church 
Association,"  *  appears  to  have  complained  to  the 
Bishop  ;  and  although  he  was  the  only  one  who 
objected  to  Mr.  Wix's  ways,  yet  the  Bishop  took 
occasion  thereby  to  order  Mr.  Wix's  abstinence 
from  the  ceremonial  use  of  lighted  candles  and 
incense,  whether  during  Divine  Service  or  sub- 
sidiary thereto.  Believing  that  his  usage  in  these 
respects  was  not  touched  by  the  judgment  of  the 
Judicial  Committee  in  the  Mackonochie  case,  IVIr. 
Wix  refused.     The  Bishop  thereupon  forbade  the 

*  Church  Times,  July  23,  1869. 

PROSECUTION    OF   THE    REV.    R.    H.    E.    WIX.  275 

two  clergymen  who  had  been  assisting  Mr.  Wix 
without  hcence,  viz.  the  Eev.  E.  Wilkins  and  the 
Eev.  Henry  Painter  Goodridge,  to  officiate  any  more 
at  Swanmore,  and  refused  to  Hcense  any  clergy- 
man in  their  place.  Mr.  Wix  was  ill,  but  the 
Bishop  refused  to  reconsider  his  action.  The  two 
churchwardens  wished  to  present  his  Lordship 
with  a  memorial  in  favour  of  Mr.  Wix,  signed  by 
480  parishioners  and  members  of  the  congre- 
gation, but  his  Lordship  would  not  receive  it ; 
and  not  only  so,  but  took  proceedings  in  the 
ecclesiastical  courts.  The  case  was  heard  on 
the  10th  of  November,  1869,  before  the  Dean  of 
Arches.  A  point  of  law  arose  as  to  whether  the 
suit  had  not  legally  been  terminated  by  the  resigna- 
tion of  Bishop  Sumner,  which  had  taken  place  on 
the  28th  of  October.  After,  however,  hearing  argu- 
ments on  either  side  of  the  question,  the  Dean  of 
Arches  gave  permission  to  continue  the  case,  only 
making  an  alteration  in  the  title  ;  and  reserved  the 
question  of  costs.  Mr.  Wix  did  not  refuse  to 
appear  before  the  court ;  and  when  the  court 
decided  that  he  had  acted  illegally  in  the  matter  of 
lights  and  incense  in  the  Eucharist,  he  declared  his 
intention  of  submitting.  We  must  now,  however, 
come  back  to  1868. 

It  had  been  sometimes  said  by  Low-Churchmen 
that  their  warfare  against  Eitualism  was  not  be- 
cause of  certain  vestments  or  other  ornaments,  but 
because  of  certain  doctrines  which  the  use  of 
those  vestments  or  ornaments  signified.  This  was 
not  altogether  true  ;  for  the  use  of  special  vest- 
ments   and    other   ornaments    at    the    Eucharsit 



symbolised  no  more  than  the  general  truth  that  the 
Eucharistic  service  had  a  superior  dignity  to  the 
services  of  Mattins  and  Evensong  ;  which  truth  no 
Low-Churchman,  so  far  as  we  are  aware,  had  ever 
dreamt  of  denying.  And  the  Eucharistic  vestments 
properly  so  called  signified  in  themselves  no  more 
than  our  fellowship  with  the  Lord  in  sufferings  ; 
and  the  colours  signified  our  fellowship  with  the 
Lord  and  with  His  saints  in  sorrow,  joy,  purity,  or 
the  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  all  which  the  Low- 
Churchman  admitted,  in  theory  at  least,  no  less 
than  his  Eitualistic  brother.  And  the  cross  spoke 
of  atonement  and  reconciliation,  or  faith  in  the 
same  ;  and  the  two  Eucharistic  lights  symbolised 
Christ  the  true  Light  of  the  world. 

Nevertheless  it  was  felt  that  some  attempt 
ouo-ht  to  be  made  asfainst  Catholic  doctrine  as- 
distinguished  from  Catholic  ritual ;  and  in  1867 
occasion  was  given  for  the  prosecution  of  a  noted 
Eitualist  on  account  of  the  Catholic  doctrine  of  the 
Holy  Eucharist.  It  will  be  remembered  that  this 
doctrine  had  been  attacked  by  the  Low-Church 
party  about  ten  years  before,  when  Archdeacon 
Denison  had  been  prosecuted  by  Mr.  Ditcher.  In 
that  case  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  had  pro- 
nounced the  Archdeacon's  doctrine  inconsistent 
with  the  formularies  of  the  Church  of  England ; 
but  the  sentence  had  been  quashed  in  the  Court  of 
Arches,  on  the  ground  that  the  prosecution  had 
been  undertaken  too  late.  Low-Churchmen,  there- 
fore, had  still  room  for  attacking  the  Catholic 
doctrine  a  second  time.  We  say  the  Catholic 
doctrine  ;    for  that,  beyond  doubt,  was  what  was 

"  THE    CHURCH    AND    THE    WORLD."  277 

aimed  at ;  although,  as  will  be  seen  immediately, 
some  of  the  expressions  which  formed  the  ground 
•of  the  proceedings  were  not  Catholic  at  all. 

The  occasion  of  the  present  attack  was  the 
publication  of  a  volume  of  essays  entitled  The 
Church  and  the  World ;  the  essays  treating  of 
points  then  frequently  under  discussion  between 
religious  partisans  in  the  Church  of  England.  It 
was  edited  by  the  Eev.  Orby  Shipley,  who  after- 
wards left  the  Church  of  England  for  the  commu- 
nion of  Eome.  Three  series  of  essays  appeared  : 
one  in  1866,  another  in  1867,  and  a  third  in  1878. 
The  series  for  1867  contained  a  paper  by  the  Eev. 
William  James  Early  Bennett,  Vicar  of  Frome  Sel- 
wood,  Somersetshire  :  in  which  paper  occurred  the 
following  passages : — 

"The  Priest  or  Priest  and  Deacon,  formerly 
standing  with  faces  opposite  each  other,  and  leaning 
over  the  Altar  in  apparently  amicable  conference, 
now  appear  in  their  sacerdotal  position,  as  though 
they  were  in  reality  occupied  in  the  great  Sacrifice 
which  it  is  their  office  to  offer.  Formerly  an  ordinary 
Surplice,  and  frequently  not  over-clean  or  seemly, 
covered  the  person  of  the  ministering  Priest,  no 
difference  being  manifested  between  that  and  all 
other  offering  of  prayer  ;  now  the  ancient  vestments 
present  to  crowds  of  worshippers  the  fact  that  here, 
before  God's  Altar,  is  something  far  higher,  far  more 
awful,  more  mysterious,  than  aught  that  man  can 
speak  of,  namely,  the  Presence  of  the  Son  of  God 
in  human  flesh  subsisting.  And  towards  this  are 
tending  all  the  ancient  rites  of  the  Church  which 
are  now  in  course    of  restoration.      The   solemn 

278  LANGUAGE    USED    BY    MR.    BENNETT. 

music  and  the  smoke  of  the  incense  go  up  before 
God,  assuring  the  world  that  here  there  is  no  appear- 
ance only  of  love,  but  a  reality  and  a  depth  which 
human  hearts  cannot  fathom,  nor  even  the  angels 
themselves.  The  incense  is  the  Mediation  of  Jesus  as- 
cending from  the  Altar  to  plead  for  the  sins  of  man."  * 
Mr.  Bennett  had  also  written  A  Plea  for  Tole 
ration  in  the  Church  of  England,  in  a  Letter  to  the 
Rev.  E.  B.  Pusey,  D.D.,  Regius  Professor  of  Hebrew y 
and    Canon    of   Christ    Church,   Oxford.      In    this 
(which  was  originally  published  in  the  year  1868) 
the  author  had  spoken  of  "  the  real,  actual,  and 
visible  Presence  of  our  Lord  upon  the  altars  of  our 
churches,"  f  and  had  said,  "  Wlio  myself  adore^ 
and   teach  the  people  to  adore,  the   consecrated 
elements,  believing  Christ  to  be  in  them — believing 
that  under  their  veil  is  the  Sacred  Body  and  Blood 
of  my  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ."  J 

On  account  of  these  passages  the  Council  of  the 
"  Church  Association  "  decided,  in  March  1868,  on 
commencing  proceedings  against  Mr.  Bennett  for 
publishing  unsound  doctrine.  In  this  the  Associa- 
tion manifested  either  a  profound  ignorance  of  theo- 
logy, or  else  a  wicked  malice  against  the  individual 
whom  they  were  attacking,  if  not  both.  For  if 
their  object  had  been  to  attack  the  Catholic  doctrine 
pure  and  simple,  that  object  could  not  be  attained  by 
attacking  such  expressions  as  those  last  cited ;  for 
these  expressions  would  be  rejected  by  any  Catho- 
lic who  was  tolerably  well  instructed  in  Catholic 

*  Church  and  the  World,  pp.  12,  13. 

t  Plea  for  Toleration,  1st  and  2nd  editions,  p.  3;  6th  edition,, 
p.  2.  t  III.  p.  14  ;  5th  edition,  p.  11. 


theology;  and  the  use  of  them  by  Mr.  Bennett 
showed  that  gentleman  to  be  no  theologian  at  all, 
so  far  as  the  Eucharistic  controversy  was  concerned. 
It  is  possible  that  the  "  Church  Association  "  may 
have  acted  in  simple  ignorance ;  but  it  is  also 
possible  that  they  may  have  been  actuated,  as  in 
their  prosecution  of  Mr.  Mackonochie,  by  malice 
against  the  individual,  and  have  aimed  merely  at 
getting  the  expressions  in  question  condemned  for 
the  purpose  of  ousting  Mr.  Bennett  from  his  living, 
and  gaining  for  themselves  a  power  of  pretending 
that  the  condemnation  had  been  passed  against  the 
doctrine  of  the  whole  Catholic  Church.  But  how- 
ever all  this  may  have  been,  the  prosecution  was 
determined  on,  and  the  person  in  whose  name  it  was 
arranged  to  carry  it  on  was  T.  Byard  Sheppard, 
Esq.,  of  Selwood  Cottage,  Erome — a  parishioner  of 
Mr.  Bennett's. 

The  Church  and  the  World,  and  likewise  the  Plea 
for  Toleration,  had  been  published  in  London ; 
and  therefore  complaint  was  made  to  the  Bishop 
of  London  (Dr.  Tait)  in  the  first  place.  That 
prelate,  however,  declined  to  move  in  the  matter 
until  compelled  by  law.  Application  was  then 
made  to  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench,  which  issued 
a  writ  of  mandamus  requiring  the  Bishop  of  Lon- 
don to  examine  the  doctrine  against  which  ex- 
ception had  been  taken,  and  to  determine  whether 
or  not  to  issue  a  commission  of  inquiry  as  to  the 
prima  facie  grounds  for  further  proceedings.  The 
Bishop  thereupon  appointed  a  commission,  which 
assembled  on  the  3rd  of  November,  and  unani- 
mously decided  that  there  was  ground  for  further 

280  BENNETT    CASE. 

proceedings  ;  and  a  report  hereof  was  sent  to  the 
Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells  (Lord  Auckland),  in 
whose  diocese  Mr.  Bennett's  parish  was  situated.* 

The  case  was  brought  before  Sir  Eobert  Philli- 
more,  Dean  of  Arches,  on  Tuesday,  the  oth  of 
October,  1869  ;  application  being  made  for  the 
admission  of  the  articles  containing  the  several 
charges  of  alleged  heresy.  The  Dean  of  Arches 
said  that  he  would  appoint  a  sitting  for  the  ad- 
mission of  the  articles,  and  also  name  a  day  for 
hearing  the  arguments.  On  the  30th  of  October 
he  directed  the  articles  to  be  reformed,  by  omit- 
ting all  such  as  charged  the  defendant  with  con- 
travening the  XXIXth  Article  of  Eeligion,  "  Of 
the  wicked  which  eat  not  the  Body  of  Christ  in 
the  use  of  the  Lord's  Supper."  From  this  ruling 
the  "  Church  Association "  appealed,  with  the 
Dean's  permission,  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of 
Privy  Council ;  which,  on  the  26th  of  March, 
1870,  affirmed  Sir  Eobert  Phillimore's  judgment, 
and  on  the  8tli  of  April  formall}^  remitted  the 
case  to  him.  Then  the  "  Church  Association " 
tried  to  get  fresh  letters  from  the  Bishop  of  Bath 
and  Wells,  in  order  to  warrant  a  charge  against 
Mr.  Bennett  over  and  above  what  had  been  al- 
lowed.    In  this,  however,  they  failed. 

The  case  was  argued  on  the  16th  of  June  and 
two  following  days,  1870.  Mr.  Bennett  did  not  ap- 
pear either  in  person  or  by  counsel.  The  charges 
against  him  were  practically  three  : — Teaching  (1) 
the  Eeal  Presence ;  (2)  the  Eucharistic  offering  of 
the  Lord's  Body  and  Blood;  and  (3)  adoration  of 

*  Annual  Bejjort  of  the  Cliurcli  Association  for  1868,  p.  50. 


the  Lord  as  present  under  the  form  of  the  con- 
secrated elements.     Judgment  was  pronounced  on 
the  23rd  of  July.     In  anticipation  of  this,  and  in 
deference  to  Dr.  Pusey,  Mr.  Bennett  had  withdrawn 
some  of  his  unadvised  language.     He  ceased  to 
speak  of  the  Lord's  Presence  on  the  altar  as  visible. 
Listead  of  professing  to  adore,  and  teach  others  to 
adore,  the  consecrated  elements,  believing  Christ 
to  be  in  them,  he  now  said,  "  Who  myself  adore, 
and  teach  the  people  to  adore,   Christ  present  in 
the   Sacrament,    under    the    form   of  bread   and 
wine."     Having  respect  to   these  matters,  and  to 
the  great  authorities  which  the  judge  cited.  Sir 
Eobert  pronounced  that  Mr.  Bennett  had  not  thus 
transgressed  the  liberty  allowed  by  the  law.     He 
made,  however,  no  order  as   to  costs.     From  this 
decision  the  "  Church   Association "   appealed   to 
the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council ;  which 
tribunal,  however,  confirmed  the  judgment  of  the 
Court    of    Arches,    to    the    unspeakable    discom- 
fiture of  the  Low-Church   party.     And   no  won- 
der ;    for    it    was    now    ruled    by    the    supreme 
authority   in   the    State    that   the   following   lan- 
guage (besides  Mr.  Bennett's  other  expressions  as 
amended)  was  lawful  in  the  Church  of  England  : — 
"  Since  it  was  His  true  Body  that  was  given  for  us 
on  the  cross,  it  is  His  true  Bod}^  which  was  given 
to   us    in   the   Sacrament.       The   manner   of  the 
Presence  is  different ;  the  Body  which  is  given  is 
the  same."     "  It  is    a   Presence    without  us,  not 
within    us    only."     "  Our   Eucharistic    Office   has 
become  a  living,  real,  spiritual  offering  of  Christ 
upon  the  altar."     The  Archbishop  of  York  (Dr. 


Thomson)  afterwards  spoke  of  the  judgment  of 
the  Privy  Council  in  this  case  as  having  been  a 
miscarriage  of  justice  :  on  what  grounds,  however, 
his  Grace  did  not,  we  beheve,  state.  The  Eev. 
E.  W.  Dibdin,  Minister  of  West  Street  Chapel, 
St.  Giles's,  London,  viewed  the  matter  differently ; 
and,  considering  the  Church  of  England  to  be  com- 
mitted, through  the  Privy  Council  judgment,  to  a 
doctrine  which  he  did  not  believe,  resigned,  in 
1871,  his  diocesan's  licence,  and  chose  to  officiate 
thenceforward  independently  of  the  Anglican  ec- 
clesiastical organisation.* 

Eecurring  now  to  the  year  1869,  we  may  note 
that  the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury  in  this  year  presented 
to  the  House  of  Lords  a  Bill  for  reform  of  the 
ecclesiastical  courts.  The  Bill  was  supported  by 
the  council  of  the  "  Church  Association,"  but  lost. 
In  the  same  year  certain  inhabitants  of  Liverpool 
memorialised  the  Bishop  of  Chester  (Dr.  Jacobson), 
of  whose  diocese  LiverjDool  then  formed  a  part, 
against  the  Eev.  Charles  Parnell,  Perpetual  Curate 
of  St.  Margaret's,  Toxteth  Park,  Liverpool,  for 
having,  in  a  paper  of  instructions  put  forth  to  his 
congregation,  recommended  them  to  receive  the 
Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Body  in  the  open  palm. 
This  custom,  derived  from  primitive  Christianity 
as  it  was  in  th.e  time   of  St.   Cyril  of  Jerusalem,f 

*  See  a  notice  signed  L.  T.  D.  in  the  Record.  I  have  not  been 
able  to  verify  the  reference  ;  but  it  should  be  in  some  number  for  the 
end  of  July  or  beginning  of  August  1871. 

t  See  the  passage,  Catech.  [23]  Mystag.  5,  n.  18  [al.  21] 
(p.  331.  c),  cited  in  Bingham  (ed.  1855),  vol.  v.  p.  443,  note.  It 
may  be  translated  thus  :  "  In  approaching,  therefore,  come  not  with 
outstretched  joints,  or  fingers  disjoined,  but  making  the  left  hand 

DECEASE    OF   THE    REV.    C.    EEIDGES.  283. 

had  been  revived  in  the  Church  of  England  by- 
some  High-Churchmen,  and  had  on  that  account 
alone,  as  would  seem,  been  resisted  by  Low-Church- 
men ;  insomuch  that  on  more  than  one  occasion  a 
Low-Church  clergyman  had  refused  the  sacrament 
to  persons  who  persisted  in  presenting  the  open 
palm  rather  than  the  fingers.  And  we  are  sorry 
to  record  of  Bishop  Jacobson,  so  estimable  in  many 
respects,  that  on  this  occasion  he  so  far  gave  in 
to  the  impertinent  memorialists  as  to  call  that 
method  of  communicating  which  had  been  recom- 
mended by  Mr.  Parnell,  after  the  holy  priest  of 
Jerusalem,  "  degrading  and  disgusting."  * 

In  this  year  two  eminent  Low-Church  clergy- 
men died — the  Eev.  Charles  Bridges,  and  the  Eev. 
Alexander  E.  C.  Dallas.  The  former  had  been 
born  March  24,  1794  ;  and  after  passing  the  usual 
course  of  study  at  Queen's  College,  Cambridge, 
was  ordained  deacon  in  1817,  to  the  curacy  of 
Gosfield,  in  Essex.  He  became  Vicar  of  Old 
Newton  in  Suffolk  in  1823,  Eector  of  Melcombe 
Eegis,  Dorset,  on  the  nomination  of  the  Eev.  Ed- 
ward Holland,  in  1849,  and  Eector  of  Hinton 
Martell  in  1855,  on  the  nomination  of  the  Earl  of 
Shaftesbury.  He  is  best  known  by  his  Commen- 
taries on  Psalm  CXIX.,  on  the  Book  of  Proverbs,f 

to  be  a  seat  for  the  right,  as  being  about  to  receive  a  King,  and 
making  your  palm  hollow,  receive  the  Body  of  Christ,  adding  the 
Amen  :  and  taking  heed  not  to  lose  any  of  this  same  Thing  una- 
wares ;  since  it  is  clear  that  whatsoever  thou  losest,  it  is  as  though 
thou  hadst  been  maimed  in  a  limb  of  thine  own." 

*  Church  Times,  November  5,  1869. 

t  We  have  had  occasion  to  refer  to  this  before,  to  show  how 
little  even  Mr.  Bridges  knew  of  the  nature  of  the  Christian  Dispen- 
sation.    See  above,  p.  194,  note. 

284      DECEASE  OF  THE  EEV.  A.  R.  C.  DALLAS. 

and  on  Ecclesiastes,  and  by  liis  work  on  the 
Christian  Ministry.  He  died  on  the  day  after  the 
foundation-stone  of  the  now  re-built  parish  church 
of  Hinton  Martell  had  been  laid,  i.e.  on  April  2. 

Mr.  Dallas  had  been  ordained  June  17,  1821,  to 
the  curacy  of  Eadley  in  the  Diocese  of  Salisbury ; 
in  the  same  year  he  left  this  curacy  and  took  that 
of  Highclere,  Hants  ;  leaving  that  for  Wooburn  in 
Buckinghamshire,  which  he  held  for  about  two 
years.  He  then  became  Curate  of  Burford,  in 
Oxfordshire.  In  1827  he  was  appointed  to  the 
vicarage  of  Yardley,  and  in  1828  to  the  rectory 
of  Wonston,  which  he  held  till  his  decease,  on  the 
12tli  of  December,  1869.  He  had  written  many 
tracts,  edited  The  Pastors  Assistant  (most  of  which, 
we  believe,  was  from  his  own  pen),  and  been  active 
in  the  cause  of  more  than  one  Low-Church  society. 

Two  or  three  other  matters  may  be  mentioned 
under  the  heading  of  the  same  year  (1869).  It 
will  have  l^een  sufficiently  evident,  even  from  the 
early  part  of  these  Annals,  that  there  had  been  two 
religions  contending  for  mastery  within  the  Church 
of  England.  This  has  often  been  denied  by  per- 
sons of  no  distinctive  religion  themselves  ;  but  it 
had  been  admitted  by  Low-Churchmen  more  than 
once,*  and  it  received,  about  the  time  whereof  we 
are  speaking,  two  illustrations  independent  of  one 
another.  It  had  been  desired  by  certain  High- 
Church  clergymen  of  the  Diocese  of  London  that 
there  should   be    attempted  this   year  in  London 

*  "  There  are  essentially  two  Churches  in  our  Church,  and  they 
«annot  exist  together." — Christian  Observer  for  1845,  p.  126. 
"  Two  diametrically  opposite  codes  of  doctrine." — lb.  p.  172. 


what  was  technically  known  in  some  foreign 
Cathohc  churches  as  a  "  Mission  ;  "  i.e.  a  special 
effort  for  the  conversion  of  the  careless  and  the 
ungodly,  and  the  quickening  of  spiritual  hfe  in 
parishioners  at  large.  A  committee  was  formed  ta 
promote  the  plan,  and  the  London  clergy  in  general 
were  invited  to  take  part  in  carrying  the  plan  inta 
execution.  Most  of  the  Low-Church  clergy,  how- 
ever, preferred  working  on  their  own  lines,  and 
would  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  original  com- 
mittee. The  other  illustration  was  this  :  Li  view 
of  the  Church  Congress  to  be  held  this  year  at 
Liverpool,  Dean  M'Neile  was  asked  whether  he 
wished  to  read  a  paper,  or  make  a  speech,  on  the 
subject  of  Cathedrals,  at  the  said  Congress.  The 
"  great  and  good  "  Dean  asked,  in  reply,  that  his 
name  might  be  altogether  erased  from  the  pro- 
gramme of  the  Congress,  on  the  ground  that  he 
could  not  be  a  party  to  the  recognition  of  Mr. 
Mackonochie  as  an  acceptable  fellow-labourer; 
Mr.  Mackonochie  having  been  (as  he  said)  "  con- 
demned by  the  highest  tribunal  in  the  country." 

It  may  also  be  mentioned  that  the  Christian 
Observer  had  of  late  vears  been  contendino-  with 
difficulties.  The  proprietors  professed  to  have 
received  encouragement  to  continue  the  concern ; 
but  hinted  that  in  continuing  it  the  friends  of 
Evangehcal  truth  should  rally  to  their  support.* 

*  Preface  to  volume  for  1869. 



Immoral  Period,  contimied.  Disestablishment  of  the  Irish  Church. 
Agitation  against  the  Athanasian  Creed.  Consecration  of  St. 
Peter's,  Clerkenwell.  Bill  for  admitting  Dissenters  to  Anglican 
Pulpits.  Decease  of  the  Eev.  Henry  Venn  the  younger.  Bio- 
graphical Notice  of  him.  Opppositionto  the  Confraternity  of 
the  Blessed  Sacrament.  Decoration  of  St.  Paul's.  Erection  of 
St.  Mary's  Hall,  Cheltenham. 

The  1st  of  January  in  tlie  year  1871  was  an  event- 
ful day  for  the  Protestant  Cliurcli  of  Ireland.  On 
that  day,  in  pursuance  of  an  Act  of  Parliament 
passed  in  1869,  the  Church  of  Ireland  became  dis- 
established— that  is  to  say,  made  independent  of 
its  sister  the  Church  of  England,  plundered  of  its 
buildings  and  its  revenues,  and  its  prelates  inca- 
pacitated from  sitting  in  the  House  of  Lords  by 
virtue  of  their  ecclesiastical  office. 

The  only  effect,  however,  worth  mentioning, 
which  this  wicked  and  sacrilegious  measure  pro- 
duced upon  the  Church  of  England  was  to  bring 
over  to  England  a  certain  number  of  Irish  clergy- 
men who,  thinking  to  better  their  position  in  the 
world,  left  the  Disestablished  Church  for  her  more 
fortunate  sister,  and  so  swelled  the  number  of 
Low-Church  clergymen  on  the  eastern  side  of  St. 
George's  Channel.  This  was  owing  to  the  pro- 
visions of  the  Act.  Under  it,  every  person 
deriving  any  income  from  the  Irish  Church  pre- 
viously to  its  disestablishment  was  considered  as 
a  life-annuitant,  the  Government  guaranteeing 
him  the  amount  of  such  income  annually  until  his 
death.     He  might,  however,  elect  to  commute  ;  that 

RESULTS    OF    IT.  287 

is,  to  draw  his  income,  not  from  the  Government, 
but  from  the  Eepresentative  Church  Body :  and  in 
this  case  the  Government  paid  over  to  that  body,  out 
of  the  pkmder  seized,  a  capital  sum,  equivalent  in 
value,  according  to  the  rules  of  life-annuity  offices, 
to  the  amount  which  the  commuting  party  had 
been  receiving.  The  Eepresentative  Church  Body 
was  thenceforward  answerable  for  paying  the  said 
party  his  income.  The  commuting  party,  having 
done  this,  might  agree  with  the  Eepresentative 
Body  to  accept  in  lieu  of  such  annual  income  a 
capital  sum  at  once  :  this  was  called  compounding  ; 
and  when  it  was  done,  the  compounder's  legal 
responsibilities  to  the  Church  in  which  he  had 
been  serving  would  cease.  And  some  clergymen, 
having  thus  secured  for  themselves  the  position 
described  by  Bishop  Wilberforce  of  Winchester  to 
working-men  at  a  Church  Congress,*  proceeded  to 
increase  their  income  by  taking  work  in  England  ; 
while  others,  content  with  what  they  had  got,  sat 
down  at  their  ease  and  took  no  more  regular  work 
at  all.  These  were  then  said  to  have  commuted, 
-compounded,  and  cut. 

About  the  year  1871  an  agitation  was  got  up 
against  the  use  of  the  Athanasian  Creed ;  and  it 

*  Bishop  Wilberforce  was  addressing  a  meeting  of  working-men 
at  the  Southampton  Church  Congress  in  1870 — the  first  workin^^- 

men's  meeting  which  was  ever  held  at  a  Church  Congress and 

he  was  speaking  of  himself  as  being  a  working-man.  A  voice  came 
from  the  body  of  the  meeting — "How  about  the  pay,  Sam?" 
"  I  will  answer  my  friend  there,"  said  the  Bishop.  "  I  am  ex- 
tremely obliged  to  him  for  putting  the  question.  The  pmj  goes  on 
all  the  same,  whether  I  work  or  am  idle  ;  and  I  should  like  to  know 
how  much  work  my  friend  there  would  do  under  similar  circum- 


appears  to  have  been  in  reality  part  of  an  agitation 
against  the  use  of  all  forinulEe  of  belief :  for  Dr. 
Jowett,  the  Master  of  Balliol  College,  Oxford,  and 
one  of  the  writers  of  the  notorious  Essays  and 
Reviews,  suppressed  even  the  Apostles'  Creed  on 
week-days  in  his  college-chapel.  The  agitation 
was  furthered  by  the  declaration  of  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury  (Dr.  Tait)  in  the  Upper  House  of 
his  Convocation  regarding  the  minatory  clauses 
in  the  Athanasian  Creed,  "  We  do  not,  there  is 
not  a  soul  in  this  room  who  does,  nobody  in  the 
Church  of  England  takes  them  in  their  plain  and 
literal  sense."  In  consequence  hereof,  the  English 
Church  Union  got  up  a  petition  to  Convocation 
for  the  retention  of  the  S3^mbol  in  question.  Dr. 
Liddon,  Canon  of  St.  Paul's,  got  up  another ;  and 
the  clerical  sis^natures  to  those  were  in  the  as^crre- 
gate  more  than  sixteen  hundred.  Archdeacon 
Denison  got  up  a  declaration  in  these  terms  : — 
"•  We,  the  undersigned  priests  and  deacons,  do 
solemnly  declare  that  we  do  not  recite  the  Athana- 
sian Creed  with  private  mental  reservation,  but 
accept  and  believe  its  words  in  their  plain  literal 
sense."  To  this  the  signatures  were  six  hundred 
and  seventy-two.  We  did  not  see  more  than  one 
which  we  recognised  as  that  of  a  Low-Church- 

In  the  same  year  was  consecrated  St.  Peter's 
Church,  Clerkenwell.  This  church  had  been 
erected  with  the  contributions  of  those  who  wished 
to   commemorate    "  the    Smithfield    martyrs,"    as 

*  Namely,  that  of  the  Eev.  E.  H.  Perowne,  Corpus  Cliristi 
College,  Cambridge. 

MR.    COWPER-TEMPLE's    BILL.  289 

those  persons  were  designated  wlio  had  suffered 
in  Smithfield  for  their  Protestantism,  and  was 
therefore  called  by  them  "  the  Martyrs'  Memorial 
Church."  The  patronage  was  vested  in  trustees. 
The  architecture  and  arransfements  were  of  a 
character  answerable  to  the  object  contemplated 
by  the  builders.  The  prayer-desk  was  made 
facing  the  congregation ;  the  outside  of  the  build- 
ing was  decorated  with  effigies  of  the  principal 
Zuingiian  heretics  who  had  been  executed  ac- 
cording to  the  law  of  the  land,  and  also  with  a 
sculptured  representation  of  somebody  being  burnt 
alive.  But  neither  within  or  without  was  "  the  sisn 
of  the  Son  of  Man  "  to  be  anywhere  seen  ;  or  if  it 
was  to  be  seen,  we  ourselves  never  succeeded  in 
seeing  it. 

In  this  year,  too,  was  introduced  into  the  House 
of  Commons,  by  Mr.  Cowper-Temple  and  Mr. 
Thomas  Hughes,  a  bill  for  enabling  an  incuml^ent, 
with  the  bishop's  approval,  to  admit  to  his  pulpit 
persons  not  in  Anglican  orders.  Of  this  measure 
(which  happily  never  became  law)  the  Christian 
Observer  expressed  a  general  approval ;  only  wish- 
ing that  the  Archbishop  should  be  able  to  license 
a  Dissenting  preacher  for  the  whole  province,  or 
the  Crown  for  the  whole  kingdom  !* 

We  must  not  omit  to  notice  here  the  decease, 
on  the  17th  of  January,  187B,  of  one  w^ho  had 
succeeded  his  father,  as  the  father  had  succeeded 
the  grandfather,  in  being  an  eminent  Low-Church 
leader.  We  speak  of  Henry  Venn  the  younger. 
Secretary  to  the  "  Church  Missionary  Society,"  son 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1871,  p.  792. 
II.  20 

290  REV.    H.    VENN    THE    YOUNGER. 

of  John  Venn,  the  Eector  of  Clapham,  and  grandson 
of  Henry  Venn  the  elder,  anthor  of  the  Comjilete 
Duty  of  Man. 

Henry  Venn  the  younger  v^^as  born  at  Clapham 
on  the  10th  of  February,  1796.  His  father,  John 
Venn,  died  in  June  1813,  after  constituting  his  son, 
"  whose  prudence  and  discretion  "  (said  he)  "  wiU 
amply  make  up  for  his  v^ant  of  years  and  expe- 
rience," one  of  his  executors.  Henry  Venn  began 
residence  at  Queen's  College,  Cambridge,  in  Octo- 
ber 1814,  under  Dr.  Isaac  Milner,  then  President. 
He  used  to  attend  Mr.  Simeon's  church,  and  also 
the  parties  of  undergraduates  v^diich  used  to  meet 
at  Mr.  Simeon's  rooms  for  conversational  instruc- 
tion on  Friday  evenings.  He  read  steadily,  gained 
a  college  prize  for  Latin  declamation,  and  prizes 
also  for  classics  and  mathematics  ;  and  was  elected 
scholar  in  his  second  year.  In  the  Mathematical 
Tripos  of  1818  he  was  nineteenth  Wrangler,  and  a 
year  later  was  elected  Fellow,  A  few  months  after- 
wards he  received  deacon's  orders  at  the  hands  of 
the  Bishop  of  Ely  (Dr.  Sparke),  doubtless  on  his 
college-title.  While  looking  out  for  a  curacy  he 
did  duty,  as  wanted,  in  London  and  the  neighbour- 
hood, and  when  not  otherwise  engaged  used  to 
attend  for  the  most  part  St.  John's  Chapel,  Bedford 
Eow,  then  served  by  Daniel  Wilson,  afterwards 
Bishop  of  Calcutta.  His  first  curacy  was  that  of 
St.  Dunstan's,  Fleet  Street,  then  mostly  a  sole 
charge,  the  Eector,  Mr.  Lloyd,  being  absent  for 
half  the  year  at  another  benefice  which  he  had, 
and  suffering  at  all  times  from  bad  health.  Mr. 
Venn  entered  upon  this  curacy  in  Januar}^  1821, 


and  was  ordained  to  the  priesthood  a  few  months 
afterwards.  He  held  the  cnracy  till  near  the  end 
of  1824,  when  he  returned  to  Cambridge  with  a 
view  to  regular  and  systematic  professional  study, 
and  also  with  a  view  to  takincf  his  B.D.  degree, 
that  being  required  of  him  by  the  statutes  of  his 
college.  In  1827  he  accepted  Mr.  Wilberforce's 
presentation  to  the  vicarage  of  Drypool,  in  York- 
shire, near  the  mouth  of  the  Humber ;  went  to 
reside  there  in  1828  ;  and  brought  a  wife  there  in 
the  following  year.  Like  other  Low-Church  in- 
cumbents of  that  day,  he  seems  to  have  worked  his 
parish  with  great  diligence,  as  parish  work  was  then 
understood.  He  organised  various  useful  agencies, 
such  as  district-visiting,  clothing-clubs,  and  mission- 
ary meetings  in  connection  with  the  "  Church  Mis- 
sionary Society."  In  his  church  the  services  appear 
to  have  been  in  the  morning  and  afternoon  of 
Sundays,  with  a  catechetical  lecture  in  the  evening 
when  a  confirmation  was  in  prospect,  and  perhaps 
(for  aught  that  we  have  been  able  to  learn)  every 
Sunday.  In  preparing  his  candidates  for  con- 
firmation he  gave  notice  a  month  before  the  con- 
firmation-day, lectured  the  candidates  three  times 
a  week  in  the  church,  and  saw  each  individual 
privately,  sitting  in  church  for  this  purpose  five 
hours  a  day  during  the  last  six  days.* 

In  October  1834  he  left  Drypool  for  the  incum- 
bency of  St.  John's,  HoUoway,  to  which  he  was 
presented  by  the  trustees.  The  population  of  the 
district  was  then  between  three  and  four  thousand. 
But  Mr.  Veim  soon  acquired  an  acquaintance  with 

*  Memoir,  p.  59. 


292  REV.    H.    VENN    THE    YOUNGER. 

his  people  personally.  "  An  incident  lie  once 
mentioned  v^^ill  serve  to  sliov^^  how  complete  this 
acquaintance  was.  A  man  came  hurriedly  to  him 
one  day  from  a  chemist's  shop,  saying  that  a  dose 
of  poison  had  just  been  obtained  by  some  unknown 
person,  whose  suspicious  manners  made  him  now 
fear  that  a  suicide  was  intended,  and  desiring  to 
know  whether  anything  could  be  suggested.  Mr. 
Venn  ran  over  in  his  mind  a  sort  of  mental  list  of 
his  parishioners,  and  soon  felt  certain  that,  if  the 
purchaser  in  question  was  one  of  them,  he  knew 
the  only  likely  man.  They  went  at  once  to  the 
suspected  house  ;  his  suspicions  were  confirmed, 
and  the  man  was  stopped  before  any  mischief  was 
done."  * 

In  1838  he  was  laid  up  with  a  dangerous  dis- 
order— dilatation  of  the  heart  and  aorta  ;  and  had 
to  cease  from  work  to  a  great  extent  for  nearly 
two  years.  In  1841  he  became  honorary  secre- 
tary of  the  "  Church  Missionary  Society,"  and  in 
January  1846  he  resigned  his  living,  and  was 
appointed  the  Society's  paid  secretary.  This  post 
he  retained  till  within  a  short  time  of  his  decease, 
which  took  place,  as  we  have  said,  in  1873. 

Mr.  Venn  shared  in  the  Zuinglian  views  com- 
monly held  by  his  party.  He  wrote  to  a  friend  in 
1845  :  "  I  am  reading  Archbishop  Cranmer  on  the 
Lord's  Supper.  It  is  close  reading  and  I  have 
little  time.  It  has  several  allusions  to  the  Baptismal 
Service,  and  seems  to  me  to  quite  overturn  your 
theory,  as  far  as  his  authority  goes.  He  compares 
the  lang^uage  of  the  two  sacraments  together.     In 

*  Memoir,  pp.  75,  7G. 


the  Lord's  Supper,  This  is  my  body,  when  it  only 
represents  it.  In  Baptism,  This  child  is  regenerate, 
when  regeneration  is  only  represented.  I  give 
what  seems  to  me  the  substance  of  general  pas- 
sages :  pray  look  at  this.  Cranmer  seems  to  me 
to  take  the  view  in  which  I  now  rest,  namely,  that 
'  sacramental,'  or  '  federal,'  language  is  essen- 
tially different  in  its  construction  and  signification 
from  plain  prayer  and  thanksgiving,  and  must  be 
construed  upon  different  jDrincijDles."*  Mr.  Venn's 
paper  on  the  proj^er  interpretation  of  the  Baptismal 
Service  of  the  Church  of  England  is  printed  in  an 
appendix  to  Mr.  Knight's  memoir  of  him.  It  was 
substantially  "  drawn  up  in  the  year  1850,  when 
the  '  Gorham '  judgment  of  the  Court  of  Arches 
was  under  the  review  of  the  Judicial  Committee  of 
the  Pri\^^  Council,  in  compliance  with  the  request 
of  one  of  the  prelates  who  was  an  assessor  in  that 
review,  and  who  was  pleased  to  say  that  the  paper 
contained  a  reasonable  solution  of  the  main  diffi- 
culty of  the  case."  This  prelate,  by  the  way,  must 
have  been  either  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
(Dr.  Sumner)  or  the  Ai^hbishop  of  York  (Dr.  Mus- 
grave) :  most  probably  the  former.  In  our  own 
opinion,  the  paper  is  one  of  the  finest  specimens  of 
sophistry  which  we  have  ever  seen.  After  citing 
Cranmer's  answers  to  Weston's  interpretation  of 
a  passage  in  St.  Chrysostom,  the  writer  proceeds : 
"  The  answers  of  Cranmer,  if  drawn  out  in  the 
form  of  an  argument,  assume  that  words  which 
seem  to  bear  a  literal  and  absolute  sense  require 
a  different  interpretation  when  used  in  connection 

*  Memoir,  pp.  265-6. 


with  a  sacrament.  The  sacrament  rules  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  language.  Cranmer  refers  to  this 
principle  of  interpretation  as  necessary  to  a  right 
understanding  of  Baptism  as  M^ell  as  of  the  Lord's 
Supper,  and  Cranmer  had  the  chief  hand  in  the 
construction  of  our  Liturgical  Services."*  Mr. 
Venn  then  cites  instances  in  which  the  present 
tense  is  used  by  Sacred  Writers  in  a  future  signifi- 
cation, and  proceeds,  on  the  strength  of  that,  to 
attribute  a  future  signification  to  certain  past  tenses 
in  the  Angfican  Baptismal  Offices,  and  to  deduce, 
further,  the  conclusion  that  "  the  true,  natural, 
and  proper  interpretation  of  the  Baptismal  Service 
respecting  the  regeneration  of  an  infant  is  not  that 
regeneration  is  absolutely  and  always  communi- 
cated in  baptism."f  Li  other  words,  that  the 
future  interpretation  of  the  aforesaid  past  tenses 
may  turn  out  false,  after  all :  for  what  he  calls 
the  Sacramental  interpretation  is  "  consistent  with 
the  Charitable,  Hypothetical,  or  Conditional  mode 
of  interpreting  the  Baptismal  Service."J  He  does 
not,  however,  explain  how  the  words  "  sacra- 
mental" and  "federal"  come  to  be  (as  he  uses 
them)  synonymous;  nor  why  plain  language  in 
one  document  is  to  be  construed  hi  a  different 
way  to  the  same  language  in  another. 

Mr.  Venn  was  a  man  of  remarkable  good  sense 
and  business  habits.  But  his  biographer  records 
this  wonderful  piece  of  nonsense  in  a  letter  to  the 
Eev.  J.  Venn,  Hereford : — "  I  fought  hard  to  get 
in  a  few  words  that  our  chief  objection  to  light 

*  Memoir,  p.  481. 
t  Ih.  p.  488.  X  lb.  p.  489. 


and  incense  was  their  countenance  of  Eomisli  vows 
renounced  at  the  Eeformation."*  Such  an  effect 
has  Protestantism  on  the  intellect !  He  disap- 
proved of  church  restoration  generally,  calling  it 
"  the  mischievous  fashion. "f  As  a  member  of  the 
Eitual  Commission,  he  worked  hard  to  get  the 
Prayer-book  altered  in  a  Protestant  direction.  He 
wished  the  rubric  about  vestments  so  altered  as  to 
enforce  the  custom  generally  prevailing  before  the 
Catholic  revival.  He  advocated  the  non-exemp- 
tion of  proprietary  chapels  from  the  restrictions  to 
be  proposed  by  the  Commissioners.  He  wished 
the  permission  still  to  be  in  force  of  placing  the 
altar  in  the  body  of  the  church  :  the  rubric  which 
bears  on  the  subject  being,  in  his  judgment,  a  pro- 
test against  bringing  back  the  Mass.  He  wished 
the  eastward  position  forbidden  to  the  celebrant ; 
because  "  as  soon  as  he  turned  the  north-west 
corner  he  was  slipping  into  the  position  of  a  sacri- 
ficing priest  at  a  Eomish  Mass. "J  His  later  views 
of  Eitualism,  however,  were  thus  expressed : — 
"  With  all  these  errors  and  superstition,  there  is  a 
marked  work  of  the  Spirit  going  on  in  this  country. 
A.B.,  with  all  the  nonsensical  practices  observed 
in  his  church,  preaches  the  Gospel,  and  souls  are 
converted.  Fifty  years  ago  his  sermons  would 
have  been  called  Methodistical."(^  Though  even 
then  he  showed  how  little  he  understood  the  High- 
Church  party,  when  he  could  write  about  "  the 
silly  dishonour  done^.to  His  [Christ's]  office  by 
those  who "  (said  he)  "  obscure  it  by  sacerdotal- 

*  Memoir,  p.  271.       Mr.  Knight  gives  no  preceding  context, 
t  lb.  p.  202.  I  lb.  p.  501.  §  lb.  p.  284. 


ism."*  That  was  about  the  year  1869.  Even  as 
he  had  said  in  his  sermon  at  the  consecration  of 
Dr.  Pelham  to  the  See  of  Norwich,  that  supersti- 
tion substitutes  sacramental  grace  for  the  truth 
of  the  Atonement  made  by  Christ. f  The  year 
1873  showed  how  far  some  Low-Churchmen  con- 
sidered promises  to  be  binding  which  had  been 
made  to  High-Churchmen.  One  of  the  numerous 
High-Church  societies  was  the  Confraternity  of 
the  Blessed  Sacrament.  The  objects  of  this  Con- 
fraternity were  two :  the  honour  due  to  the 
Person  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  the  Blessed 
Sacrament  of  His  Body  and  Blood,  and  mutual 
and  special  intercession  at  the  time  of  and  in 
union  with  the  Eucharistic  Sacrifice.  The  rules 
were,  to  communicate,  or  at  least  to  be  present  at 
celebration,  on  Sundays  and  the  greater  festivals, 
and  other  holy-days,  unless  prevented  by  sickness 
or  other  urgent  excuse  ;  to  promote,  by  all 
legitimate  means,  frequent  and  reverent  celebra- 
tions of  the  Holy  Eucharist,  as  the  chief  act  of 
Divine  Service  ;  and  to  make  such  special  inter- 
cessions as  should  be  from  time  to  time  directed. 
To  this  last  rule  exception  might  be  taken  by  a 
Churchman  of  any  party ;  for  the  placing  oneself 
under  it  involved  the  giving  up  of  one's  own  re- 
sponsibility in  the  matter  of  private  prayer.  It 
does  not  appear,  however,  that  this  formed  the 
only  ground  of  exception  on  the  part  of  Low- 
Churchmen  against  the  Confraternity :  their  dis- 
like of  the  Confraternity  arose,  it  is  probable,  from 
the  doctrine  which  the  members  j^rofessed  to  hold, 

*  Memoir,  p.  356.  t  Cited  ih.  p.  140. 

BREACH    OF    PROMISE.  297 

and  on  which  they  proposed  to  act ;  that  doctrine 
being  the  same  which  both  the  Court  of  Arches 
and  the  Privy  Council  had  declared  lawful,  but 
which  Low-Churchmen  denied  and  hated.  Now,  in 
the  town  of  Gateshead,  in  the  Diocese  of  Durham, 
there  had  been  constituted  a  mission-district,  which 
had  been  placed  under  the  charge  of  the  Eev. 
John  Wilkinson.  A  church  was  in  process  of 
erection,  towards  which  the  Low-Church  Bishop  of 
Durham  (Dr.  Baring)  had  promised  a  contribution 
of  fifty  pounds.  Being,  however,  informed  that 
Mr.  Wilkinson  was  a  member  of  the  Confraternity 
of  the  Blessed  Sacrament,  his  Lordship  deemed 
that  fact  a  sufficient  justification  for  departing 
from  his  word  ;  and  the  promised  contribution  was 
refused.  It  was  made  up  by  the  proprietor  of  the 
Church  Times. 

It  may  also  be  noted,  with  reference  to  the  work 
of  decorating  St.  Paul's  Cathedral  internally,  in 
a  manner  agreeable  to  the  architecture,  how 
the  Christian  Observer  regarded  that  good  work. 
"  Strenuous  efibrts  "  (said  the  Editor)  "  are  being 
made  to  convert  St.  Paul's  Cathedral  into  a  huge 
Jesuit  church,  with  all  the  oppressive  and  vulgar 
gorgeousness  characteristic  of  that  false  taste 
which  is  the  concomitant  of  false  doctrine."* 

In  the  following  year  (1874)  was  erected  the 
building  known  as  St.  Mary's  HaU,  St.  George's 
Place,  Cheltenham.  It  formed  the  premises  of 
that  college  for  training  Low-Church  school- 
mistresses the  establishment  of  which  w^e  have 
already   noted   under   the   year   1847.     Like    St. 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1873,  p.  560. 


Paul's  College,  the  home  of  the  sister-institution 
for  training  Low-Church  schoolmasters,  the  build- 
ing did  not  include  a  chapel,  though  intended  to  ac- 
commodate sixty  resident  students  :  it  was  deemed 
sufficient  that  the  students  should  attend  prayers 
in  the  large  lecture-hall,  but  the  authorised  services 
of  the  Church  only  on  Sundays  at  the  Church  of 
St.  Matthew.* 


Immoral  Period,  continued.  Persecution  of  the  Rev.  John 
Edwards.  Public  Worshii)  Eegulation  Act.  Lord  Penzance. 
Commencement  of  Mr.  Edwards's  Prosecution.  New  Suit  against 
Mr.  Mackonochie. 

"  Shall  the  throne  of  iniquity  have  fellowship  with  Thee,  which 
frameth  mischief  hj  a  law?  " — Psalm  xciv.  20  (Bible  version). 

The  year  1874  witnessed  another  wicked  suit 
against  a  faithful  Anglican  priest.  The  living  of 
Cheltenham  had  been  purchased  by  Mr.  Simeon  of 
Cambridge,  and  vested  in  trustees  appointed  by  him, 
and  of  his  way  of  thinking,  and  the  place  had  thus 
come  to  be  a  stronghold  of  the  Low-Church  party. 
And  (as  was  to  have  been  expected)  a  branch  of 
the  "  Church  Association  "  had  been  formed  there, 
and  numbered  a  good  many  members.  These  began 
to  look  about  them  for  some  practical  way  of  show- 
ing their  hatred  of  Catholic  ways  ;  and  they  had 
not  to  look  very  far  off,  for  at  a  distance  of  some 
two  or  three  miles  from  Cheltenham  they  found  not 

*  See  above,  p.  12. 


only  a  Eitualistic  priest  and  congregation,  but  a 
Eitualistic  parish,  to  wit,  the  parish  of  Prestbury. 
Of  this  parish  the  Eev.  John  Edwards  (afterwards 
Baghot  de  la  Bere)  had  become  vicar,  October  25, 
1860.  The  living  was  a  family  one  ;  Mr.  Edwards's 
family  was  known  in  the  place,  and  he  entered  upon 
his  pastoral  charge  with  a  certain  amount  of  pre- 
judice, on  the  part  of  the  parishioners,  in  his  favour. 

Mr.  Edwards's  University  life  is  thus  described 
by  the  Eev.  James  Eidgway,  Honorary  Canon  of 
Christ  Church,  Oxford,  in  a  letter  to  the  Guardian 
of  February  9,  1881  :— 

"I  have  known  John  Edwards,  of  Prestbury 
(Baghot  de  la  Bere),  for  thirty  years,  and  as  he 
had  now  been  judicially  pronounced  by  one  who 
claims  to  be  the  highest  ecclesiastical  judge  in  this 
realm  (acting  for  and  in  the  name  of  the  spiritual 
head  of  the  English  Church)  unfit  to  exercise  his 
clerical  functions  in  this  Church  of  England,  I  ven- 
ture to  ask  a  small  space  in  your  columns  to  do 
him  an  act  of  bare  justice. 

"  I  first  became  acquainted  with  John  Edwards 
when  he  and  I  were  undergraduates  together,  at 
Oxford,  on  his  joining  a  small  band  associated  to- 
gether to  strengthen  one  another  in  the  cultivation 
of  habits  of  devotion,  the  study  of  God's  Word, 
obedience  to  authorities  as  over  them,  pursuit  of 
mental  training,  frugality,  and  purity  of  life.  They 
drew  up  '  rules  of  life  '  as  their  guide,  which  were 
mainly  these — to  rise  an  hour  before  chapel  for 
prayer,  to  read  the  Bible  devotionally  for  a  pre- 
scribed time  each  day,  to  attend  chapel  twice  a 
day  and  Holy  Communion  weekly  (if  provided),  to 

300  REV.  JOHN  Edwards's  antecedents, 

guard  the  tongue  and  the  eye  from  sin,  to  abstain 
from  all  places  of  dissipation,  to  keep  their  body  [sic] 
in  temperance,  soberness,  and  chastity,  to  speak  evil 
of  no  man,  to  use  their  utmost  endeavours  to  make 
the  best  use  of  the  University  for  the  training  of 
their  minds  as  the  duty  of  their  state  of  pupillage, 
to  practise  fasting  and  self-denial  in  meat,  drink, 
and  dress,  so  as  to  devote  at  least  one-tenth  of  their 
income  to  charity. 

"  For  thirty  years  he  has  had  this  '  rule  of  life ' 
stedfastly  before  him.  I  have  known  him  inti- 
mately the  whole  time.   .  .  . 

"  At  Oxford  he  was  entirely  free  from  any  fana- 
ticism, conspicuous  for  calm  solidity  of  character, 
steadily  pursuing  his  vocation  in  simplicity,  perse- 
verance, holiness,  humility.  A  man  who  thus  passes 
safely  through  the  dangerous  ordeal  of  an  under- 
graduate's career,  when  passions  are  strong  and 
temptations  are  very  great,  seldom  alters  much  in 
after  life  :  he  has  been  no  exception.  When  I  be- 
came curate  there,  he  was  one  who  tendered  me 
voluntary  help  in  a  very  poor  parish,  by  reading  to 
the  sick,  teaching  in  our  night  schools,  and  singing 
in  our  choir.  His  parting  gift  to  me  when  he  left 
Oxford  was  a  book  of  devotions  for  the  clergy. 
A  few  months  later,  I  met  him  accidentally  in  the 
Strand,  when  he  amazed  me  with  the  intelligence 
that  he  had  obtained  a  commission  in  the  army, 
and  was  about  to  sail  for  India  :  but  he  never 
went.  I  never  asked  him  the  reason.  ...  It  could 
not  have  been  the  hope  of  succeeding  to  the  vicar- 
age of  Prestbury  ;  for  his  father,  who  held  it,  was  in 
the  prime  of  life,  and  is  living  still.     A  few  months 

AND    WORK    AT    PRESTBURY.  301 

later,  he  was  curate  of  St.  Paul's,  Knightsbridge, 
and  in  eight  years,  on  the  resignation  of  his  father, 
became  Vicar  of  Prestbury." 

Mr.  Edwards's  conduct  subsequent  to  his  entry 
into  the  vicarage  showed  that  the  prejudice  of  the 
parishioners  in  his  favour  was  not  a  mistaken  one. 
Active  as  a  parish  priest,  and  possessing  a  true 
pastor's  heart,  he  led  his  people  on  from  one  im- 
provement to  another,  till  the  parish  became  one  of 
the  best  examples,  probably,  of  what  an  English 
parish  should  be.  The  church  was  restored  and 
beautified.  The  Eucharist  was  celebrated  daily, 
the  services  were  offered  with  heartiness  and  re- 
verence, and  attended  devoutly.  At  Christmas 
1860  there  were  only  thirty-nine  communicants, 
but  at  Easter  1869,  the  first  celebration  after  the 
church  had  been  fully  restored,  and  advanced  ritual 
had  been  introduced,  there  were  two  hundred  and 

We  believe  it  to  be  perfectly  true,  that  when  Mr. 
Edwards  had  come  into  residence  as  vicar,  being 
known  to  be  a  High-Churchman,  not  one  of  the 
Cheltenham  clergy  did  him  the  civility  of  a  call. 
The  antagonism  to  him,  however,  on  the  part  of  his 
Low-Church  neighbours,  was  not  merely  negative. 
On  Good  Friday,  the  11th  of  April,  1873,  a  tailor 
named  Charles  Combe,  and  another  person,  who 
appears  to  have  been  the  Baron  de  Ferrieres,  a 
member  of  the  "  Church  Association,"  *  prepared 
for  the  Easter  Festival  by  signing  what  they  term 
a  presentment  against  Mr.  Edwards.  This  docu- 
ment was  sent  to  the  Bishop  of  Gloucester  and 

*  Church  Times,  Feb.  24,  1882. 

302  MR.  Edwards's  persecutors. 

Bristol  (Dr.  Ellicott),  promptly  acknowledged  by 
liim,*  and  acted  upon  as  the  basis  of  subsequent 

The  antecedents  of  Mr.  Edwards's  nomimal  prose- 
cutors were  not  altogether  such  as  to  give  them 
any  moral  right  to  act  as  they  did.  Combe  was 
stated  to  be  a  Nonconformist. f  Certainly  he  never 
had  been  a  communicant  at  Prestbury,  even  before 
the  restoration  of  the  church,  or  the  introduction 
of  full  Catholic  ritual.  But  when,  at  the  Bishop's 
next  visitation,  a  regular  legal  presentment  was 
made  by  the  churchwardens,  it  was  quietly  set 
aside ;  the  reason  being,  apparently,  as  Mr.  Ed- 
wards inferred,  that  it  did  not  subserve  the  purposes 
of  persecution,  while  the  earlier  document  did. 

The  charges  against  Mr.  Edwards  were  thirteen 
in  number.  They  included  the  having  the  metal 
crucifix  on  the  re-table,  with  candles  by  the  side 
thereof,  which  candles  were  lighted  at  certain  parts 
of  the  service ;  and  the  bowing  to  or  towards  the 
crucifix  in  a  ceremonial  manner ;  and  likewise  the 
wearing  the  Eucharistic  vestments.  Mr.  Edwards's 
case  appears  to  have  come  before  the  Court  of 
Arches  on  the  2ord  of  January,  1875,  when  the 
Court  was  moved  to  expunge  certain  passages  in 
the  responsive  plea  filed  by  Mr.  Edwards,  and 
which  were  to  the  following  effect :  that  Mr.  Combe 
was  promoting  the  suit  [against  the  wish  and  de- 
sire of  the  parishioners  generally ;  and  that  in  fact 

*  St.  Mary's,  Presthury.  The  Prosccniion.  A  Letter  to  the 
(late)  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  by  John  Baghot  de  la  Bere, 
Vicar,  pp.  26,  27. 

t  Leadiiig  article  in  Church  Times,  Nov.  4,  1881. 


238  communicants,  of  whom  197  were  parishioners, 
had  expressed  to  the  defendant  and  to  the  Bishop 
their  dishke  of  the  suit  and  the  disturbance  which 
it  was  causing  in  the  parish ;  that  Mr.  Combe  had, 
both  at  the  time  when  the  suit  M^as  instituted,  and 
also  at  the  time  then  present,  a  pew  in  an  Inde- 
pendent meeting-house  at  which  he  constantly 
attended,  paying  rent  for  the  said  pew ;  and  that 
he  was  promoting  the  suit  at  the  instigation  and 
cost  of  the  Baron  de  Ferrieres  and  other  persons 
residing  in  Cheltenham,  and  who  w^ere  not  parish- 
ioners of  Mr.  Edwards.  The  Dean  of  Arches 

The  chief  event,  however,  of  the  year  1874  was 
the  passing,  in  the  interests  of  the  Low-Church 
party  and  of  irreligion  in  general,  of  the  Public 
Worship  Eegulation  Act ;  perhaps  the  very  greatest 
wrong  which  the  Church  of  England  had  ever 
suffered  since  the  manifold  wrongs  of  the  Great 
Eebellion.  We  have  seen  that  in  1868  two  bills 
bearing  upon  the  conduct  of  Anglican  worship  had 
been  brought  into  Parliament,  and  another  bill  in 
1869  for  reforming  the  ecclesiastical  courts.  The 
bill  of  which  we  are  now^  to  speak  was  to  combine 
the  alleged  objects  of  all  the  three  former  ones. 
The  origin  of  it  is  involved  in  some  obscurity.  The 
whisper  went  about,  and  was  never,  so  far  as  we 
are  aware,  contradicted,  that  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  received  an  intimation  from  a  certain 
high  quarter  that  he  was  expected  to  take  some 
step  or  introduce  some  measure  for  puttino-  down 
Eitualism,  towards  which  certain  members  of  the 
Eoyal  Family  were  thought  to  be  inclined.      And 


certainly  there  was  some  ground  of  objection  against 
the  courses  of  procedure  in  the  ecclesiastical 
courts,  independent  of  party  considerations  or 
theological  bias.  In  particular,  the  "  Church  Asso- 
ciation "  had  found  the  proceedings,  both  in  the 
case  of  Mr.  Mackonochie  and  in  that  of  Mr.  Purchas, 
to  be  both  tedious  and  costly  ;  and  they  wanted  a 
new  Act  which  should  enable  them  to  work  for 
putting  down  Eitualism  with  a  greater  probability 
of  success  than  was  possible  at  present.  They 
wanted  a  new  provision  for  prosecutions — that 
proceedings  might  be  taken  against  a  Eitualist  by 
almost  anyone,  irrespective  of  moral  right.  They 
wanted  anew  provision  for  judgments  :  not  learned 
judgments,  proceeding  upon  extensive  and  accurate 
knowledge  of  Church  law  and  custom,  and  which 
might  give  the  defendant  the  benefit  of  any  doubt 
in  the  judge's  mind,  but  such  judgments  as  might 
lend  the  cloak  of  authority  to  cover  any  amount  of 
ignorance  or  iniquitous  partiality.  It  mattered  not 
how  the  Church  was  wronged,  it  mattered  not  how 
the  Constitution  in  Church  and  State  and  the  pro- 
visions of  Magna  Charta  were  violated ;  the  prac- 
tical assertion  of  parliamentary  omnipotence  in  the 
interests  of  the  Low-Church  party — this  was  what 
Low-Church  people  wanted. 

And  this,  by  God's  all-wise  permission,  Low- 
Church  people  got.  On  the  20th  of  April,  1874, 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  introduced  into  the 
House  of  Lords,  with  the  express  concurrence  of 
all  the  bishops  save  two,  a  Bill  for  the  Eegulation 
of  Public  Worship,  allowing  any  three  parishioners 
who  chose  to  declare  themselves  members  of  the 


Church  of  England  to  prosecute  their  parish 
priest  for ,  any  alleged  breaches  of  the  ritual  law. 
And  it  is  to  be  observed  that  no  test  of  Church- 
membership  was  prescribed,  or  any  penalty  pro- 
vided for  making  a  declaration  falsely.  The  bill 
had  been  drafted,  under  the  Archbishop's  direction, 
by  Chancellor  Brunei.  In  introducing  it  the  Primate 
declared  his  belief  that  the  people  of  England  be- 
held in  Eitualism  a  disposition  to  return  towards 
the  Eomish  ceremonial,  and  that  unless  the  rulers 
of  the  Church  came  forward  to  restrain  it  the  people 
would  consider  that  the  raison  d'etre  of  the  union 
between  Church  and  State  had  disappeared.  A 
clause  for  abolishing  the  old  episcopal  courts  and 
creating  a  new  court  with  a  new  parliamentary 
jurisdiction  was  moved  by  the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury 
in  Committee  ;  both  the  Archbishops  resisted  this, 
but  it  was  carried  against  them.  Then  the  Earl  of 
Shaftesbury  moved  that  the  judge  of  the  new  court 
should  have  a  stipend  of  three  thousand  pounds, 
payable  out  of  the  funds  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Com- 
missioners. Against  this  combined  injury  and 
insult  the  Archbishop  of  York  protested  ;  and  then 
followed  a  scene,  with  mutual  contradiction  by  the 
Archbishop  and  the  Earl.  In  a  discussion  as  to 
the  manner  in  which  the  new  judge  should  deal 
with  cases,  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  (Dr.  Mackarness) 
prophesied  what  he  called  a  strike  among  the 
bishops,  and  then  followed  another  scene.  At  last, 
however,  the  bill  passed  the  Upper  House,  the 
whole  bench  of  bishops  voting  for  it  except  Dr. 
Moberly  of  Salisbury,  who  voted  against  it,  and 
two  or  three  who  absented  themselves  on  the 
ir.  21 


occasion ;  so  little  account  did  the  right  reverend 
fathers  make  of  their  spiritual  jurisdiction  in  matters 
of  discipline. 

After  passing  the  Lords,  the  bill  was  brought 
into  the  House  of  Commons  by  the  Eight  Hon. 
Eussell  Gurney,  Conservative  member  for  South- 
ampton. Mr.  Disraeli  was  then  Prime  Minister. 
He  did  not  at  first  know  what  the  object  of  the 
bill  was,  and  asked  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
in  a  casual  way,  "  Wliat  is  it  for  ?  what  is  it  intro- 
duced to  do  ?  "  The  Archbishop  replied,  "  To  put 
down  the  Eitualists."  *  On  the  morning  of  the  day 
(July  15)  fixed  for  the  second  reading,  the  Arch- 
bishop received  a  note  from  Mr.  Disraeli  to  the 
effect  that  the  Government  could  not  let  the  bill 
go  on.  Forthwith  his  Grace  went  to  Sir  William 
Vernon  Harcourt,  then  Solicitor-General,  and  the 
result  of  the  interview  was  that  the  second  reading 
was  carried,  with  the  help  of  a  great  many  Con- 
servative members. f  That  was  the  occasion  on 
which  the  Premier,  anticipating  an  accession  of 
popularity  as  the  result  of  the  line  which  he  took, 
stated  plainly  in  the  House  that  the  bill  had  for 
its  object  the  putting  down  of  Eitualism,  and  made 
his  famous  sneer  at  what  he  chose  to  call  the  Mass 
in  masquerade ;  the  meaning  of  which  phrase, 
however,  was  not  so  obvious  as  the  aimnus  of  it, 
though  the  phrase  was  eagerly  caught  up  and  re- 
peated by  Low-Churchmen. 

Some  alterations  were  proposed  in  the  Commons 

*  Letter  of  "A  South  London  Parson"  in  the  Morning  Post, 
Nov.  10,  1881. 

t  Archdeacon  Denison,  Notes  of  my  Life,  p.  57. 


which  were  not  accepted.     Thus  Mr.  Eaikes,  Con- 
servative member  for  Chester,  advocated  the  non- 
exemption  of  private  chapels  from  the  provisions 
•of  the  bill ;    and  Mr.  Lowe,  Liberal  member  for 
the  University  of  London,  thought  that  the  bill 
should  be  so  extended  as  to  admit  of  prosecutions 
for  false  doctrine.     But  at  last,  with  the  support  of 
the  lion,  members  mentioned  above,  although  op- 
posed  by   Sir   Stafford   Northcote,  Mr.    Gathorne 
Hardy  (since  Lord  Cranbrook),  Lord  John  Manners, 
Lord  Henry  Lennox,  Earl  Percy,  Lord  Yarmouth, 
Mr.  J.  G.   Talbot,  and  the  Irish  Lord  Chancellor 
Ball,  it  passed  the  House,  and  came  into  operation 
on  the  1st  of  July,  1875.     By  it  the  Archbishops 
of  Canterbur}^  and  York  were  empowered  to  appoint 
one  permanent  judge    in  lieu  of  the  two  judges 
presiding  in  their  several  provincial  courts.     An 
archdeacon,  a  churchwarden,  or  three  parishioners, 
being  members  of  the  Church  of  England,  might 
make  a  representation  to  the  bishop  of  the  diocese 
respecting  any  ornaments  or  furniture  of  a  church, 
or  of  the  minister,  which  might  be  deemed  illegal, 
or  any  neglect  to  use  a  prescribed  ornament  or 
vesture,  or  any  unlawful  alterations,  omissions,  or 
additions  in  regard  to  rites  and  ceremonies.    Then, 
if  the  bishop,  "  after  considering  the  whole  circum- 
stances of  the  case  " — so  ran  the  Act — thought  that 
proceedings  ought  not  to  be  taken  on  their  represen- 
tation, he  had  to  record  in  the  diocesan  registry 
his  reasons  in  writing  ;  otherwise,  he  was  to  trans- 
mit a  copy  of  the  representation  to  the  clergyman 
against  whom  the  complaint  was  made.    If  then  the 
parties  consented  that  the  bishop  should  adjudicate, 



the  bishop  was  empowered  to  adjudicate  accord- 
ingly ;  if  they  did  not  consent,  the  case  was  to  be 
sent  to  the  new  parUamentary  judge,  from  whose 
decision  there  was  to  be  an  appeal  to  the  Queen  in 
Council.  And  obedience  to  the  order  of  the  bishop 
or  of  the  judge  might  be  enforced  by  inhibiting 
the  clergyman  from  exercising  cure  of  souls  for 
three  months.  This  wicked,  unconstitutional  Act 
the  Christian  Observer  expected  to  be  productive 
of  benefit.* 

As  if  to  embitter  the  Church's  cup  by  as  much 
insult  as  possible,  the  first  judge  appointed  under 
the  Act  was  James  Plaisted,  Baron  Penzance,  who 
from  1863  to  1872  had  been  judge  of  the  Court  of 
Probate  and  Divorce,  and  had,  it  was  said,  expressed 
spontaneously  his  willingness  to  undertake  the  new 
parliamentary  office.  In  the  old  Provincial  Court 
of  Arches,  which  Lord  Penzance's  court  was  now 
supplanting,  the  presiding  judge  had  not  been  wont 
to  enter  on  his  office  until  certified  by  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  as  sufficient  on  the  grounds 
of  piety,  learning,  and  sound  morals.  This  wa& 
not  deemed  necessary  for  the  judge  of  the  new  par- 
liamentary court.  Nor  did  the  noble  lord  qualify 
himself  by  subscribing  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  or 
taking  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  Queen,  or  any 
oath  to  deal  fairly  between  suitors. 

We  may  now  come  back  to  Mr.  Edwards  of 
Prestbury.  In  this  year  (1874)  Charles  Combe 
instituted  proceedings  against  him,  under  the 
Church  Discipline   Act,    for   Ritualistic    rites  and 

*  Christian  Observer  for  1874,  p.  719. 


■ceremonies  in  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist. 
The  case  was  sent  up  by  the  Bishop  in  Letters  of 
Eequest,  and  came  before  Lord  Penzance  shortly 
after  his  appointment  under  the  Public  Worship 
Regulation  Act,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter. 

Mr.  Mackonochie,  however,  was  not  to  be  left 
alone.     In  June  this  year  Mr.  Martin  instituted  a 
new  suit  against  him,  under  the  Church  Discipline 
Act,   complaining  of  several  alleged   breaches  of 
the   law  by  him.     This    new  suit   was   avowedly 
undertaken  for  the  sole  purpose  of  enabling  the 
prosecutors  to  have   the  services  of  a  particular 
•counsel,  two  other  suits,  in  which  nearly  the  same 
points  were  raised  as  in  this,  being  already  before 
the    courts.     "A    most   reasonable    apphcation — 
namely,  to  postpone  the  hearing  of  this  suit  till 
the  expected  decision  of  the  Privy  Council  in  a 
similar   case,  Eoughton   v.  Parnell — was   refused. 
The  articles  .  .  .  comprised  (putting  on  one  side 
the  technicalities)  the  use  of  lighted  candles  during 
Morning   Prayer ;  undue    elevation   of  the   paten 
and  cup  ;  processions  with  banners,  crucifix,  and 
candles  ;  singing  Agnus  Dei  after  the  consecration  ; 
making  the  sign  of  the  cross  ;  kissing  the  Prayer- 
book  ;  the    use   of  wafer-bread ;  the   wearing    of 
vestments ;  and   standing    in   the    eastward   posi- 
tion." *     The  case  was   heard   before  Sir  Eobert 
Phillimore,   Dean   of  Arches ;    Mr.    Mackonochie 
-appearing  before  the  court,  but  protesting  against 
the  spiritual  validity  of  any  decisions  or  judgments 
which  might  be  founded  on  the  authority  of  any 

*  Tlie  Church  in  Baldivin's  Gardens,  p.  69. 


rulings  of  the  Queen  in  Council,  or  any  purely 
secular  authority.  Sir  Eobert  Phillimore  would 
not  allow  this  protest  to  be  filed.  The  case  was 
then  heard ;  and  on  the  1st  of  December  Sir 
Eobert  pronounced  judgment.  He  acknowdedged 
the  competence  of  his  court  for  allowing  the  ques- 
tion already  decided  by  the  Privy  Council  in  the 
Purchas  case  to  be  re-argued ;  especially  as  the 
judgment  therein  given  was  irreconcilable,  as 
regarded  the  ornaments  of  the  minister,  with  the 
former  judgment  of  the  same  tribunal  in  the  case 
of  Liddell  v.  Westerton,  and  as  regarded  the  posi- 
tion of  the  minister,  irreconcilable  with  the  judg- 
ment given  in  the  case  of  Martin  v.  Mackonochie. 
And  with  regard  to  the  use  of  wafer-bread,  he 
thought  it  possible  that  if  their  Lordships  had  had 
the  opinions  of  counsel  before  them  they  would 
have  arrived  at  a  different  conclusion  from  that  at 
which  they  did  arrive.  But  notwithstanding  these 
considerations,  holding  the  point  of  elevation  to  be 
not  proved  against  the  defendant,  but  all  the  other 
points  proved,  he  suspended  Mr.  Mackonochie  ah 
officio  for  six  weeks. 

From  this  judgment,  pronounced  on  the  7th  of 
December,  1874,  but  never  served  till  26tli  of  July, 
1875,  Mr.  Mackonochie  appealed  to  the  Queen  in 
Council,  supposing  that  his  appeal  would  be  heard 
by  the  New  Court  of  Judicature.  Afterwards, 
however,  apprehending  that  this  was  a  mistake, 
and  that  it  would  be  heard  before  the  Judicial 
Committee  of  Privy  Council,  from  which  he  ex- 
pected neither  consideration  nor  impartiality,  he 
withdrew  his  appeal,  and  submitted  to  the  sentence 


of  the  Dean  of  Arches.  His  costs,  taxed  at  £460 
45.  4:d.,  were  duly  received  by  the  prosecuting 


Immoral  Period,  continued.  Memorial  against  the  Eev.  C.  E. 
Hodson.  Christian  Observer.  Memorial  against  Vestments 
and  Ea'  "ward  Position.  Case  of  the  Rev.  Flavel  Cook.  Public 
Worship  x\egulation  Act.  Line  taken  by  Low- Churchmen. 
Prosecution  of  the  Rev.  C.  J.  Ridsdale.     Results. 

Sing  a  song  of  humbug, 

A  wagon-load  of  jaw, 

Clamourmg  for  "  law  :  " 
When  "  the  Law  "  was  laid  down, 

They  went  on  all  the  same, 
Just  as  they  had  done  before, 

Without  a  bit  of  shame. 

A  New  Beading  of  an  Old  Bhyme. 

The  year  1875  was  signahsed  by  the  departure  of 
the  Arctic  Expedition  for  the  discovery,  if  possible, 
of  the  North  Pole.  The  expedition  sailed  from 
Portsmouth  on  the  29tli  of  May,  and  consisted  of 
the  "  Alert,"  Captain  Nares,  and  the  "  Discovery," 
Captain  H.  F.  Stephenson.  It  had  been  originally 
intended  that  no  chaplain  should  accompany  the 
expedition,  on  the  ground,  according  to  Mr.  Ward 
Hunt,  that  a  chaplain  would  take  up  too  much 
room.  Strong  representations,  however,  were 
made  to  the  Government  that  the  officers  and 
crews  ought  not  to  be  two  years  without  the  holy 
offices ;  and  in  consequence  hereof  it  was  finally 

*  This  was  acknowledged  in  the  report  presented  at  the  Annual 
Meeting  held  on  February  25,  1876. 


decided  that  two  chaplains  should  be  sent ;  and 
two  clergymen,  having  volunteered  for  the  service, 
were  accepted.  The  two  clergymen  were  the  Eev. 
Henry  WiUiam  PuUen  and  the  Eev.  Charles  Ed- 
ward Hodson.  The  former  had  been  an  assistant- 
master  in  St.  Andrew's  College,  Bradfield,  near 
Eeading,  Vicar-choral  of  York  Minster,  and  Vicar- 
choral  of  Sahsbury  Cathedral.  He  was  known 
to  be  the  author  of  The  Fight  at  Dame  Europas 
School,  and  was  now  appointed  chaplain  on  board 
the  "  Alert."  Mr.  Hodson  had  been  Curate  of  St. 
James's,  Devonport,  and  afterguards  chaplain  in 
the  Navy ;  he  was  now  appointed  to  the  "  Disco- 
very." Neither  of  these  clergymen  was  a  Low- 
Churchman  ;  it  does  not,  indeed,  appear  that  any 
Low-Churchman  had  volunteered  for  either  post. 
Some  Low-Churchmen,  however,  got  up  a  memorial 
to  the  Government  against  Mr.  Hodson,  on  the 
ground  that  he  was  a  member  of  the  Confraternity 
of  the  Blessed  Sacrament.  It  need  hardly  be  added 
that  the  memorial  failed  of  success. 

In  this  year  the  proprietors  of  the  Christian 
Observer  found  it  necessary  to  amalgamate  that 
periodical  with  another,  and  the  united  magazine 
was  henceforth  known  as  the  Christian  Observer 
and  Advocate. 

We  have  seen  that  neither  in  the  Mackonochie 
case  nor  in  the  Purchas  case  had  the  eastward 
position  of  the  celebrant  when  consecrating  the 
Eucharistic  elements  been  pronounced  illegal ;  but 
that  in  the  Purchas  case  the  Eucharistic  vestments 
had  been  condemned  as  illegal.  The  "  Church 
Association,"  however,  had  a  misgiving  that  the 

JENKINS   V.   COOK.  313 

Eucharistic  vestments,  no  less  than  the  eastward 
position,  might  yet  be  declared  permissible,  if  not 
•obligatory  ;  and  hence  they  deemed  it  advisable 
to  get  up  a  memorial  to  the  Queen  against  both. 
And  such  a  memorial  was  got  up  accordingly,  and 
presented  to  her  Majesty  on  the  oOtli  of  June, 
1875,  after  receiving  the  signatures  of  140,480 
persons  calling  themselves  members  of  the  Church 
of  England. 

The  Low-Church  party,  however,  were  not  en- 
tirely on  the  wrong-doing  side.  About  this  time 
a  stand  was  made,  though,  unhappily  (as  some 
thought),  only  a  temporary  one,  by  a  Low-Church 
■clergyman,  on  behalf  of  what  little  ecclesiastical 
'discipline  still  survived  in  the  Church  of  England. 
A  barrister,  Mr,  Hemy  Jenkins,  had  put  forth  a 
publication,  apparently  for  family  use :  *  it  was 
entitled  Selections  from  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments^ and  in  it  he  had  omitted  such  passages  as 
seemed  to  imply  the  endlessness  of  future  punish- 
ment, and  the  existence  of  the  personal  evil  spirit 
called  in  Scripture  the  Devil,  and  had  arranged 
such  a  selection  of  readings  from  Holy  Scripture 
as  seemed  to  impugn  the  character  of  the  passages 
-omitted  therefrom,  as  "  quite  incompatible  with 
religion  or  decency  ;  "  this  being  expressly  stated 
in  a  letter  written  by  Mr.  Jenkins.  Considering 
that  Mr.  Jenkins  had  thus  become  what  the 
Prayer-book  terms  a  slanderer  of  God's  Word,  his 
parish  priest,  the  Eev.  Flavel  James  Cook,  Vicar 

*  We  say  "  apparently,"  for  the  book  had  no  preface  of  any 
kind  to  indicate  the  system  on  which  the  Selections  had  been 

314  MR.    COOK    CONDEMNED. 

of  Christ  Clmrcli,  Clifton,  refused  him  the  Holy 
Communion.  Appeal  was  then  made  to  the  Bishop 
(Dr.  EUicott),  who  thereupon  issued  a  commission 
to  investigate  Mr.  Jenkins's  complaint ;  and  the 
Commissioners  reported  that  there  was,  in  their 
oipmioii,  prima  facie  ground  for  further  proceedings. 
On  the  23rd  of  January,  1875,  Dr.  Tristram  prayed 
the  Court  of  Arches  to  accept  Letters  of  Eequest 
from  the  Bishop  authorising  criminal  proceed- 
ings against  Mr.  Cook ;  and  Sir  Eobert  Phillimore 
assented.  The  case  having  been  duly  argued,  the 
Dean  of  Arches  pronounced  judgment  to  the  effect 
that  Mr.  Cook  had  been  fully  justified  in  repel- 
ling Mr.  Jenkins  from  Communion.  Mr.  Jenkins 
thereupon  appealed  to  the  Judicial  Committee 
of  Privy  Council ;  which  body,  after  hearing  the 
case,  dehvered  judgment  on  the  16th  of  February, 
1876.  According  to  this  determination,  the  omis- 
sion from  Mr.  Jenkins's  work  of  certain  Scripture 
passages,  on  the  specific  ground  stated  in  the 
appellant's  letter,  that  those  passages  were  quite 
incompatible  with  rehgion  and  decency,  supphed 
no  sufficient  ground  for  concluding  that  the  appel- 
lant rejected  the  doctrines  implied  thereby.  And  in 
consequence  the  court  reversed  the  decision  of  the 
Dean  of  Arches,  and  condemned  Mr.  Cook  in  costs. 

The  Rock  newspaper,  whilst  repudiating  Mr. 
Jenkins's  theology,  deemed  that  a  different  judg- 
ment from  that  which  the  Judicial  Committee  had 
given  "  would  have  struck  an  infinitely  more 
serious  blow  against  the  truth." 

Mr.  Cook  did  not  see  his  way  to  making  figlit„ 
and  therefore  immediately  resigned  his  benefice. 


On  the  1st  of  July  in  this  year  (1875)  there 
came  into  operation  the  PubHc  Worship  Eegiila- 
tion  Act ;  the  shght  sketch  of  which  given  above 
will  have  sufficed  to  show  how^  alien  the  spirit  of 
it  w^as  from  the  spirit  of  English  criminal  law"  in 
general.  For  not  only  did  it  give  the  Bishop  a 
veto  on  any  criminal  proceedings  w^hicli  might 
have  been  commenced  under  it,  but  l)y  allow^ing 
appeals  to  the  Privy  Council  it  both  denied  to  a 
defendant  that  benefit  of  doubt  which  is  always 
given  to  a  person  charged  with  a  civil  crime,  such 
as  murder  or  burglary,  and  also  permitted  him 
to  be  tried  more  than  once  for  the  same  alleged 
ofience.  It  does  not,  how^ever,  appear  to  have  re- 
ceived at  the  hands  of  Anglican  Churchmen  gene- 
rally that  consideration  which  was  fitting  while 
before  Parliament.  The  Eitualistic  party  was 
still  in  a  minority ;  and  their  enemies  were  well 
content  with  an  Act  which  the  Prime  Minister 
himself,  in  supporting  it  through  the  House  of 
Commons,  had  declared  to  have  for  its  object  the 
putting  down  of  Eitualism.  Indeed,  that  state- 
ment of  Mr.  Disraeli's  was  sometimes  alleged  by 
Low-Churchmen  as  a  reason  why  the  Act  ought 
not  to  be  interpreted  to  the  disadvantage  of  Low- 
Churchmen  for  violating  rubrics  in  ways  common 
among  them.* 

Such,  however,  as  it  w^as,  it  had  now  become 
available  for  use  ;  nor  were  the  Low^-Church  party 
slow  to  put  it  in  operation.  And  as  that  part  of 
our  Annals  on  which  we  have  now  entered  wdll 
consist  almost  entirely  of  the    narrative    of  suc- 

*  So,  at  least,  it  was  alleged  to  the  writer  by  a  Low-Church 


cessive  prosecutions  for  alleged  breaches  of  the 
Church's  ritual  law,  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  make 
a  few  remarks  here  upon  the  character  of  the 
Low-Church  party  as  indicated  by  the  line  thus 
taken  by  their  most  active  members  with  the  tacit 
consent  of  the  rest. 

To  many  persons  the  conduct  of  the  Low-Church 
party  towards  their  Eitualistic  adversaries  may  seem 
strange  and  inexplicable.  Why  should  persons 
professing  zeal  for  spiritual  religion  seek  to  regu- 
late the  outward  forms  of  religion  by  Acts  of 
Parhament  and  courts  of  law?  Their  Puritan 
predecessors  had  desired  freedom  from  rubrics  ;  or 
at  least  as  much  freedom  from  rubrics  as  was 
possible :  why  should  Puritan  religionists  seek  to 
promote  their  spiritual  religion  by  enforcing 
rubrics  as  interpreted  by  hard-headed  lawyers, 
and  by  enforcing  them  too  with  heavy  costs,  sus- 
pension, deprivation,  and  imprisonment  ? 

Inconsistency,  indeed,  is,  alas,  no  uncommon 
characteristic  of  fallen  human  nature ;  but  in  the 
case  of  the  Low-Church  party  the  inconsistency 
in  the  matter  now  under  consideration  was  little, 
if  at  all,  beyond  appearance.  Their  proceedings 
were  not  taken  for  the  purpose  of  regulating  any 
outward  forms  of  religion,  so  far  as  they  them- 
selves were  concerned.  The  religion  with  which 
they  sought  to  deal  was  not  one  that  was  common 
to  themselves  and  their  adversaries,  and  the  rules 
whereof  they  were  seeking  to  get  enforced  on  all 
^like :  it  was  a  religion  entirely  distinct  from  theirs, 
and  essentially  antagonistic.  To  the  devout  Anglo- 
Catholic   the  outward  ceremonies  which  he  used 


were  a  part  of  his  religion ;  tliey  were  some  of 
those  "  works "  by  which  his  "  faith  was  made 
perfect ;  "  *  and  that  was  why  he  made  so  much 
of  them.  The  Low-Churchman,  on  the  contrary, 
had  his  reHgion  within  himself,  and  not  essentially 
involving  anything  outward  at  all.  To  him  the 
visible  Church  was  not  by  any  means  a  necessary 
thing;  nay,  so  far  from  being  necessary,  it  was 
rather  a  hindrance  than  otherwise,  when  considered 
in  connexion  with  authority.  To  him  the  Church 
was  a  merely  human  institution,  in  which  certain 
spiritual  commodities  could  be  had — and  to  which 
it  was  generally  more  advantageous  to  go  for  those 
commodities  than  to  any  other  institution — but 
that  was  all.  The  Church's  times  of  worship  mio-ht 
be  adopted  in  so  far  as  they  happened  to  square 
with  Low-Church  convenience  ;  some  of  her  prayers 
might  be  uttered  in  the  course  of,  or  expressions 
from  them  worked  up  into,  Low-Church  devotions  ; 
but  the  Church's  times,  generally  speaking,  were 

ignored  by  the  Low-Church  party  in  general, the 

Church's  prayers  were  made  to  give  place,  wher- 
ever this  was  practicable,  to  Puritan  forms,  written 
or  extempore, — and  in  the  preparation  of  these 
forms,  the  Church's  method  of  Psalms,  short 
prayers,  and  numerous  responses,  was  almost  en- 
tirely rejected.  Such  parts  of  the  Prayer-book  as 
were  customarily  in  use  were  used  at  such  times 
as  custom  required,  but  not  more.  To  say  Mattins 
or  Evensong  before  preaching  a  sermon,  and  to 
omit,  maybe,  part  of  the  Benedicite,  or  the  whole 
of  the  Athanasian  Creed ;  to  say,  on  Sundays  and 

*  James  ii.  22. 


one  or  two  holy-days,  part  of  the  Eucharistic 
Office  in  addition  (omitting,  however,  the  OiFertory- 
sentences  and  the  Prayer  for  the  Whole  State  of 
Christ's  Church),  were  duties  which  custom  re- 
quired, and  which  therefore  might,  presumably,  if 
neglected,  be  enforced  by  law  ;  and  these  duties, 
therefore,  Low-Church  clergymen  found  it  neces- 
sary to  observe.  But  in  cases  where,  through 
the  general  laxity,  liberty  was  allowed  by  the 
authorities,  it  was  plainly  apparent  how  little 
weight  Church  principles  had  with  Low-Church- 
men. Daily  public  worship  was  allowed  to  be- 
come obsolete,  and  the  general  system  of  festivals 
and  fasts  was  ii2i;nored.  With  Low-Churchmen, 
C'liurch  order  was  an  appendage  to  religion,  not  a 
part  of  it ;  and  it  was  an  appendage,  too,  more  or 
less  in  the  way.  Therefore,  in  invoking  the  law,  or 
rather  the  powers  of  the  State,  against  Eitualists, 
they  did  so  not  for  the  purpose  of  enforcing  a 
common  religion,  but  merely  for  the  purpose  of 
either  forcing  Eitualists  to  adopt  the  expression 
of  Low-Church  religion,  or  making  the  Church- 
Establishment  too  hot  to  hold  them.  It  was  as 
though  a  smuggler  should  prosecute  a  revenue- 
officer  on  the  ground  of  some  alleged  breach  of 
the  law,  not  with  the  object  of  compelling  the 
officer  to  observe  the  law,  but  with  the  object  of 
getting  rid  of  him,  if  possible,  altogether ;  and 
further,  in  the  hope  of  diverting  the  attention  of 
the  authorities  from  the  smuggler's  own  illicit 

In  such  a  one-sided  manner  was  the  Act  to  be 
Avorked  ;  as  indeed  had  been  intended  from  the  first 

REV.    C.    J.    RIDSDALE.  319 

by  its  promoters.  Who  should  be  the  first  clergy- 
man to  be  attacked  under  it  by  the  "  Church 
Association  ? "  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
had  already  taken  proceedings  twice  over  against  a 
clergyman  of  his  diocese — the  Eev.  Charles  Joseph 
Ridsdale,  Perpetual  Curate  of  St.  Peter's,  Folkestone 
— for  the  ritual  used  in  his  church ;  but  the  prosecu- 
tion had  failed  in  each  case.  The  first  proceedino-s 
had  been  quashed  by  the  Archbishop's  own  dio- 
cesan judge,  on  the  ground  that  Mr.  Eidsdale  and 
his  churchw^ardens  had  been  brought  into  court 
by  a  monition  purporting  to  be  the  mere  personal 
act  of  the  Archbishop,  not  issuing  from  his  court, 
and  naming  no  prosecutor  or  complainant  against 
whom  answer  could  be  made.*  And  the  second 
proceedings  had  been  quashed  in  the  same  way 
•on  the  application  of  the  churchwardens,  and  on 
the  ground  that  Mr.  Lee,  the  nominal  promoter, 
who  had  described  himself  as  merely  residini?  in 
Broad-Sanctuary,  Westminster,  showed  no  "  in- 
terest "  in  the  affairs  of  a  church  at  Folkestone. f 
Now,  however,  Mr.  Eidsdale  became  the  object 
of  attack  by  the  "  Church  Association."  Three 
persons  were  openly  hired  by  the  agents  of  the 
Association  to  come  forward  as  aggrieved  parish- 
ioners— William  Clifton,  a  baker,  of  Saffron's  Place, 
Dover  Street ;  George  Miller,  of  28  Dover  Street ; 
and  James  Harris,  of  24  Dover  Street.  Of  these, 
Clifton,  by  his  own  account,  professed  no  relii^ion 
■at  all.     A  person  of  the  name  of  Wightwick,  who 

*  Letter  from  Dr.  Walter  Phillimore  to  the  Times,  reprinted  in 
the  Church  Times  of  November  30,  1877. 

t  He  was,  in  fact,  the  Archbishop's  Secretary. 


appears  to  have  been  Mayor  of  Folkestone,  and  a 
member  of  the  "  Church  Association,"  called  upon 
him  and  asked  whether  he  would  oblige  him  by 
attending  a  service  at  St.  Peter's  Church.  Not 
liking  to  refuse,  he  consented,  and  went  to  St. 
Peter's  with  his  daughter,  though  he  had  never 
attended  that  church  before ;  and  he  afterwards 
declared  that  he  had  not  seen  any  grounds  of  ob- 
jection in  the  way  in  which  the  service  was  con- 
ducted. To  oblige  Mr.  Wightwick  again,  however, 
he  signed  a  paper — a  similar  one,  no  doubt,  to  what 
was  proposed  and  signed  in  similar  "  Church  Asso- 
ciation "  prosecutions — authorising  the  lawyers  of 
the  Association  to  act  for  him,  and  accepting  a 
guarantee  on  the  part  of  the  Association  to  the 
effect  that  he  should  be  reimbursed  in  all  costs 
which  he  might  incur  in  process  of  the  suit. 

Some  time  afterwards,  Clifton  expressed  regret 
at  having  been  (as  he  said)  "  made  a  tool  of ;  " 
but  on  its  being  pointed  out  to  him  that  he  could 
revoke  the  proxy  which  he  had  given,  he  declined 
doingf  so  without  advice.  Harris,  another  of  the 
nominal  promoters  of  the  suit,  expressed  willingness 
to  revoke  his  proxy  if  Clifton  would  revoke  his ; 
but  the  latter,  after  some  further  dela}^,  only  con- 
sented on  condition  of  being  paid  a  sum  of  two 
hundred  pounds,* 

So  much  for  the  three  who  posed  as  aggrieved 
by  Mr.  Ridsdale's   proceedings  in    church.       The 

*  Letter  jErom  the  Rev.  Matthew  Woodward,  Vicar  of  Folke- 
stone, to  the  Daily  Express ;  reprinted  in  the  Rev.  C.  S.  Grueber's 
letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells  on  The  Becent  Judgvient,. 
Bidsdale  v.  Clifton. 


charges   put  forward  in  their   name    were  as  fol- 
lows : — 

1.  The  use  of  lighted  candles  on  the  Communion- 
table, or  on  a  ledge  immediately  over  it,  at  the  time 
of  the  celebration  of  the  Holy  Communion,  when 
those  candles  were  not  required  for  giving  light. 

2.  The  mixing  of  water  with  wine  for  the  ser- 
vice of  the  Holy  Communion. 

3.  The  use  of  wafer-bread  instead  of  bread  such 
as  is  usually  eaten  in  the  administration  of  the 
Holy  Communion. 

4.  Standing  in  the  middle  of  the  west  side  of 
the  Communion-table  with  his  back  to  the  people 
so  that  the  people  could  not  see  him  break  the 
bread  during  the  Prayer  of  Consecration. 

5.  Kneeling  during  the  Prayer  of  Consecration. 

6.  Causing  the  hymn  or  prayer  commonly  known 
as  the  Agnus  Dei  to  be  sung  during  the  Commu- 
nion Service  immediately  after  the  Prayer  of  Con- 

7.  Forming  and  accompanying  a  procession 
consisting  of  a  choir  and  two  acolytes  in  short 
surplices  and  red  cassocks  ;  four  banners,  a  brass 
instrument,  and  a  processional  cross  being  carried 
in  it ;  the  choir  singing  a  hymn,  and  the  Eespon- 
dent  walking  in  it  with  a  cap  called  a  biretta  on 
his  head ;  such  procession  taking  place  after  the 
service  of  Morning  Prayer  and  immediately  before 
the  Communion. 

8.  Forming  and  accompanying  a  like  procession 
on  another  occasion,  when  at  one  period  of  it  all 
those  who  took  part  in  it  fell  on  their  knees  and 
remained  kneeling  for  some  time. 

II.  22 


9.  Wearing  certain  unlawful  ecclesiastical  vest- 
ments, viz.  an  alb  and  a  chasuble,  while  adminis- 
tering the  Holy  Communion. 

10.  Consecrating  and  receiving  the  elements 
when  only  one  person  communicated  w4th  the  Ee- 

11.  Without  lawful  authority,  setting  up  and 
placing  upon  the  top  of  a  rood-screen,  and  retain- 
ing there,  a  crucifix  and  twenty-four  candlesticks 
with  candles,  the  candles  being  lighted  on  either 
side  of  the  crucifix,  and  so  continued  lighted, 
although  not  required  for  giving  light. 

12.  Unlawfully  setting  up  and  placing  in  his 
church  certain  representations  of  figures,  forming 
what  are  called  Stations  of  the  Cross,  such  as  are 
used  in  Eoman  Catholic  churches,  which  tend  to 
encourage  ideas  and  devotions  of  a  superstitious 
kind. — The  last  three  charges  were  not  in  the 
original  representation,  but  added  afterwards. 

It  will  be  observed  that  some  of  the  things  thus 
charged  against  Mr.  Eidsdale  were  in  principle  no 
more  than  what  was  done  by  numerous  Low-Church 
clergymen  already.  For  if  it  was  illegal  to  inter- 
polate after  the  Prayer  of  Consecration  a  hymn 
taken  from  the  Prayer-book,  it  must  also  have  been 
illegal  to  interpolate  a  hymn  and  praj^ers  after  the 
Nicene  Creed,  such  hymn,  and  sometimes  the  prayer 
also,  not  being  found  in  the  Prayer-book  at  all. 
If  it  was  illegal  for  Mr.  Eidsdale  to  walk  last  in  a 
procession  after  the  manner  described  in  charge  7, 
it  must  have  been  illegal  for  a  Low-Church  dean 
to  walk  last  in  a  procession  of  choristers  and  clergy, 
and  with  silver  staves  carried  before  him.     Again, 


if  it  was  illegal  to  kneel  after  tlie  manner  specified 
in  charge  8,  how  could  it  be  legal  for  the  dean, 
clergy,  and  choristers  to  kneel  down  and  pray 
secretly  on  arriving  at  their  several  seats  or  stalls, 
instead  of  commencing  the  service  at  once  ?  And, 
once  more,  if  several  pictures  called  Stations  of 
the  Cross  were  illegal,  what  legality  could  there  be 
in  numerous  "  altar-pieces  "  to  be  seen  in  college- 
chapels  and  parish  churches  ?  With  regard,  too, 
to  the  10th  charge,  how,  it  might  be  asked,  was 
the  celebrant  to  know  that  there  would  be  only 
one  communicant  besides  himself,  when  the  church 
was  full  of  people  ? 

The  case  came  before  Lord  Penzance  on  the  4tli 
of  January,  1876.  On  this  occasion  Mr.  Eidsdale 
did  not  refuse  to  appear.  Mr.  Benjamin  Shaw  was 
counsel  for  the  "  Church  Association ;  "  and  it  is 
to  be  observed  that  he  had  expressed  the  opinion 
distinctly  that  the  Eucharistic  vestments  were  legal, 
but  foretold  that  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy 
Council  would  decide  against  them  on  grounds  of 
expediency.  In  reference  to  the  Stations  of  the 
Cross,  and  with  a  view  to  prejudicing  the  judge  as 
to  their  Popish  character,  the  Eev.  Dominic  Cresci- 
telli,  Priest  of  St.  Peter's  Eoman  Catholic  Church, 
Hatton  Garden,  was  called  to  give  evidence.  On 
the  3rd  of  ensuing  February  judgment  was  given. 
Mr.  Eidsdale  was  declared  to  have  violated  the 
law  on  all  the  first  ten  charg-es.  With  regard  to 
the  eleventh  and  twelfth,  the  court  ordered  the 
crucifix  and  the  "  Stations  of  the  Cross "  to  be 
removed.  And  Mr.  Eidsdale  was  condemned  in 
the  costs. 



To  this  judgment  Mr.  Eidsdale  determined  to 
submit,  save  on  four  points — the  subject-matter  of 
the  third,  fourth,  ninth,  and  eleventh  charges  seve- 
rally. On  those  points  he  appealed  to  the  Judicial 
Committee  of  Privy  Council ;  and  under  a  provi- 
sion of  the  Public  Worship  Eegulation  Act  Lord 
Penzance  was  asked  to  suspend  his  monition  until 
such  time  as  the  appeal  should  be  decided.  This, 
however,  Lord  Penzance  declined  to  do.  Thereupon 
an  application  was  made  to  the  Eegistrar  of  the  Ap- 
peal Court  for  an  inhibition  on  Lord  Penzance.  A 
caveat,  however,  was  lodged  by  the  "  Church  Asso- 
ciation," and  Mr.  Eidsdale  had  therefore  to  apply  to 
the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council ;  and  their 
Lordships,  in  granting  an  inhibition,  limited  it  to 
that  part  of  Lord  Penzance's  decree  which  ordered 
the  removal  of  the  crucifix.  No  order,  however, 
was  made  as  to  costs.  The  appeal  was  argued  in 
January  1877  before  the  Judicial  Committee,  con- 
sisting of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (his  Grace 
not  seeing  any  indecency  in  his  sitting  to  judge  a 
cause  in  which  he  was  already  interested  against 
the  appellant),  the  Lord  Chancellor  (Earl  Cairns), 
the  Duke  of  Eichmond  and  Gordon,  Lord  Selborne, 
the  Lord  Chief  Baron  (Sir  Fitzroy  Kelly),  Lord 
Justice  Brett,  Mr.  Baron  Amphlett,  Sir  J.  Colville, 
Sir  Montague  Smith,  Sir  W.  M.  James,  Sir  Eobert 
Collier,  and  Sir  Eobert  Phillimore.  Judgment  was 
delivered  on  the  12th  of  May,  1877,  and  was  read 
by  the  Presbyterian  Earl  Cairns,  the  other  Lords  of 
the  Committee  being  present,  except  Lord  Chief 
Baron  Kelly,  Mr.  Baron  Amphlett,  and  Sir  Eobert 
Phillimore.      It    was   rumoured    that   Sir   James 


Hannen  and  Lord  Coleridge  had  been  prevented 
from  sitting  to  hear  the  appeal  by  a  strongly 
worded  letter  from  a  high  official  quarter.*  As  to 
wearing  the  alb  and  chasuble,  the  court  held  that 
the  Ornaments'  Eubric  was  not  meant  to  be  an 
enactment  at  all ;  and  that  the  law  as  to  vestments 
was  to  be  found  in  certain  advertisements  drawn 
up  in  1564  by  Archbishop  Parker  for  the  direction 
of  the  Province  of  Canterbury,  but  concerning 
which  he  complained  in  his  correspondence  that 
he  could  not  get  the  Queen's  authority  for  them, 
and  a  copy  of  which  her  Prime  Minister  Cecil 
endorsed  in  these  terms  : — "  These  were  not  au- 
thorised nor  pubhshed."  These  points  had  been 
brought  before  their  Lordships,  but  on  the  strength 
of  these  advertisements  the  Court  ruled  that  the 
only  vestments  to  be  worn  by  priests  or  deacons 
were,  the  surplice  in  parish  churches,  and  the 
surplice  and  cope  in  cathedrals  :  for,  said  their 
Lordships,  it  was  not  seriously  contended  that  albs 
or  chasubles  could  in  any  practical  sense  be  worn 
concurrently  with  the  surplice.  As  to  the  position 
of  the  minister  when  consecrating  the  elements, 
the  court  held  it  to  be  his  duty  to  stand  at  that 
side  of  the  table  which  was  next  the  north ;  and 
that  the  words  "before  the  table,"  in  connexion 
with  the  manual  acts,  were  meant  to  be  equiva- 
lent to  "  in  the  sight  of  the  people."  Wafer-bread, 
properly  so-called,  was  illegal :  the  words  "  it  shall 
suffice,"  used  in  the  rubric  concerning  ordinary 
bread,  meaning,  apparently,  that  nothing  else  was 
allowable.     The    decision  of  Lord   Penzance  was 

*  Church  Times,  November  9,  1877,  p.  627. 

.*^26  POLICY,    NOT    LAW. 

affirmed  in  regard  to  the  crucifix,  and  on  the  whole 
the  decree  of  the  noble  Lord  was  confirmed  in  all 
points  save  as  regards  the  position  of  Mr.  Ridsdale 
and  his  use  of  wafers ;  in  regard  of  which  the 
charges  against  him  were  not  held  to  have  been 
proved  as  to  the  facts.  The  costs  in  Lord  Pen- 
zance's court  were  to  be  paid  by  the  "  Church 
Association,"  and  there  were  to  be  no  costs  in  the 

This  judgment  was  pronounced  as  that  of  the 
whole  court  of  the   Judicial  Committee.      After- 
wards Chief  Baron  Kelly  published  a  pamphlet  in 
which  he  stated  that  he  himself  and   two   other 
members  of  the  Committee  had  dissented  from  it. 
And  in  March  1882  the  Vicar  of  Folkestone,  after 
recapitulating    at   a   meeting   of    the    Folkestone 
branch  of  the  English  Church  Union  the  marvel- 
lous pretexts  which  their  Lordships  had  assigned 
as  the    grounds  of  the  judgment,   continued   his 
speech   thus : — "  After   this,  I  was  not  surprised 
when  the  late  Lord  Chief  Baron  said  to  me  in  my 
study  at  West  Terrace,  '  It  is  an  iniquitous  judg- 
ment, Mr.  Woodward  :  the  result  of  pohcy  and  not 
of  law.' "     And  well  indeed  might  it  be  so  stigma- 
tised.    And  the  true  character  of  it  was  curiously 
brought  out  in  the  following  June  by  one  of  the 
very  judges  in  whose   name  it  was  pronounced — 
even  by  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  himself: 
when,  after  a  correspondence  with  Mr.  Eidsdale, 
the  Archbishop  professed  to  give,  and  Mr.  Eidsdale 
professed  to  receive,  a  dispensation  absolving  him 
from  the  obligation  of  using  the  alb,  the  chasuble, 
the    altar-licrhts,  and  the   mixed  chalice.      Yes,  a 


dispensation ;  thus  tacitly  implying  that  the  vest- 
ments, lights,  and  mixed  chalice  were  ordinarily 
of  obligation  on  priests  ministering  in  the  Church 
of  England.  Mr.  Eidsdale,  however,  told  his 
congregation  that  he  intended  to  obey  this  "  en- 
forced dispensation"  (as  he  called  it)  only  until 
Convocation  should  have  had  fitting  opportunity 
for  deliberating  as  to  the  propriety  of  giving  such 
a  dispensation. 

It  ought,  moreover,  to  be  mentioned  here  that 
one  of  the  members  of  the  Judicial  Committee  who 
assented  to  the  Eidsdale  Judgment,  to  wit.  Lord 
Justice  James,  had  some  ten  years  before,  when  a 
plain  Queen's  Counsel,  expressed  himself  thus  : — 
"  1.  I  am  of  opinion  that  the  use  of  the  vestments 
is  clearly  legal.  2.  I  am  unable  to  bring  my  mind 
to  entertain  a  doubt  upon  the  subject."  He  could 
understand  a  defence  set  up  against  such  pro- 
ceedings as  might  be  taken  to  enforce  the  use  of 
vestments,  if  such  defence  proceeded  on  the  ground 
of  disuse  during  a  long  period  of  time  ;  but  he  saw 
no  ground  for  imputing  illegality  to  those  who 
declined  to  avail  thernselves  of  such  excuse.  His 
Lordship's  remarkable  change  of  mind  gave  rise  to 
the  following  epigram  : — 

"  What  James,  Q.C.,  confessed  he  clearly  saw, 
A  judge  become,  he  stoutly  now  denies  : 
For  when  he  added  Justice  to  his  name. 
He  also  put  her  bandage  off  his  eyes."* 

The  effects  produced  in  the  Low-Church  party 
by  the  Eidsdale  Judgment  were  not  altogether 
uniform.    Generally  speaking,  indeed,  Low-Church- 

*  Church  Times,  May  25,  1877. 


men  were  glad  at  the  decision,  because,  however 
iniquitous,  it  was  mainly  in  favour  of  them.  Now 
and  then,  however,  the  Low-Church  utterances  con- 
cerning it  betrayed  a  consciousness  that,  although 
the  utterance  of  authority,  it  did  not  really  declare 
the  law.  Thus,  the  "  Church  Association,"  while 
gloating  over  it  in  their  report  for  1875,  spoke  of 
it  as  proving  what  was  the  law ;  as  if  to  prove  a 
position  were  the  office  of  any  judge  at  all :  and 
thus  tacitly  admitting  that  the  positions  thus  said 
to  have  been  proved  had  previously  been  matters 
of  actual  denial.  One  learned  counsel  on  the 
Low-Church  side,  when  making  a  speech  in  court, 
spoke  of  the  law  as  having  been  altered  l)y  the 
Eidsdale  Judgment ;  and  the  remark,  itself  an 
insult  to  every  free  and  freedom-loving  English- 
man, was  allowed  to  pass  uncorrected  and  un- 
challenged. One  Low-Church  clergyman,  however, 
considering  that  the  Judicial  Committee  had  not 
condemned  the  eastward  position  absolutely  as  in- 
volving the  idea  of  a  sacrificial  act  done  towards 
God,  and  considering  also,  perhaps,  that  the  doc- 
trine of  a  sacrifice  in  the  Eucharist  had  in  the 
Bennett  case  been  ruled  permissible  in  the  Church 
of  England,  thought  it  incumbent  upon  him,  being 
a  staunch  Protestant,  to  resign  his  benefice.  This 
was  the  Eev.  Dr.  Gregg,  who  afterwards  sought, 
and  with  some  difficulty  received,  a  questionable 
consecration  to  the  Episcopate,  from  that  Eeformed 
Episcopal  Church  (so-called)  in  America  which 
derives  its  succession  from  the  suspended  Bishop 
Cummins.  Previously  to  Dr.  Gregg's  secession 
from  the  Church  of  Eno-laiid  he  had  been  Vicar  of 


East  Harborne,  near  Birmingham,  in  the  Diocese 
of  Lichfield.  And  another  Low-Church  clergy- 
man, considering  that  the  Judicial  Committee,  in 
declaring  the  surplice  to  be  the  only  legal  vestment 
for  use  by  priests  and  deacons  in  parish  churches, 
had  in  effect  condemned  the  black  gown,  announced 
his  intention  of  wearing  the  surplice  in  his  pulpit 
thenceforward,  and  (if  we  remember  right)  of  con- 
forming to  the  rubric  in  some  points  in  which 
Low-Churchmen  in  general  were  in  the  habit  of 
breaking  it.  This,  however,  raised  a  wail  of  pro- 
test from  the  Eev.  Edward  Auriol,  Eector  of  St. 
Dunstan's-in-the-West,  London,  to  the  effect  that 
the  line  thus  proposed  to  be  taken  was  tantamount 
to  admitting  general  wrong-doing  by  the  Low- 
Church  party  in  the  matters  in  question.  And 
Mr.  Auriol's  protest  expressed  very  well  what  was 
the  general  feeling  of  Low-Churchmen,  viz.  that 
both  the  Public  Worship  Eegulation  Act  and  its 
administrators  w^ere  on  the  side  of  Low-Churchmen 
as  against  High-Churchmen,  and  that  therefore 
Low-Churchmen  might  go  on  in  their  old  ways 
without  troubling  themselves  about  law.  It  became, 
indeed,  a  matter  of  scandal  that  those  who  were 
most  zealous  in  seeking  to  enforce  the  Eidsdale 
Judgment  upon  High-Churchmen,  set  an  example 
themselves  of  violating  its  decisions ;  for  in  cathe- 
drals, where  the  use  of  the  cope  was  ruled  impe- 
rative in  the  celebration  of  the  Holy  Eucharist, 
Church  bishops,  Low-Church  deans,  and  Low- 
Church  canons  and  prebendaries  still  continued  to 
ofiiciate  without  it. 

330  DEATH    OF    DR.    DYKES. 


Immoral  Period,  continued.  Eefusal  of  certain  Bishops  to  license 
Curates  for  High-Churchmen.  Persecution  of  the  Eev.  A. 
Tooth.  Riotous  and  Profane  Conduct  of  Protestants  at  St. 
James's,  Hatcham. 

The  Queen  was  in  the  coimting-house, 

Coixnting  out  her  money  : 
The  Bishop  in  the  garden. 

Talking  to  his  honey. 
The  Church  was  in  the  suburbs, 

Teaching  of  the  truth — 
Pop  came  a  State  Judge, 

And  pulled  out  A  Tooth. 

A  Neiv  Beading  of  an  Old  Bhyme. 

Coming  back  now  to  the  year  1876,  we  have  to 
note  that  Low-Church  bishops  had  by  this  time  hit 
upon  a  new  device  for  stamping  out  EituaHsm. 
Bishop  Sumner  of  Winchester  had,  we  beheve,  per- 
sistently refused  to  ordain  any  man  to  the  diaconate 
on  the  title  given  by  the  Eev.  John  Keble,  Vicar 
of  Hursley,  and  author  of  the  Christian  Year.  The 
Bishop  of  Durham  (Dr.  Baring)  had  refused  to 
license  any  clergyman  to  serve  as  curate  in  Dr. 
Dykes's  parish  (that  of  St.  Oswald  in  the  city  of 
Durham),  for  no  other  reason  than  that  Dr.  Dykes 
refused  to  alter  his  ritual — permissible  by  the 
Prayer-book — a(;cording  to  the  private  opinion  of 
his  diocesan.  And  now,  owing  to  this  conduct  of 
the  Bishop,  Dr.  Dykes,  crushed  by  the  work  which 
was  thus  thrown  upon  him — for  the  population 
of  the  parish  was  4,938 — had  died,  January  22, 

The  Eev.  H.  Greenwell  also,  Vicar  of  St.  Bar- 

DEAN    ELIOT. — ST.    JAMES'S,    HATCHAM.  331 

nabas's,  Leeds,  when  needing  a  few  months'  relaxa- 
tion on  account  of  broken  health,  asked  his  dio- 
cesan, the  Bishop  of  Eipon  (Dr.  Eobert  Bickersteth), 
to  allow  the  Eev.  W.  Green  Armytage  and  the 
Eev.  E.  Ealph  Blakelocke  to  do  the  parochial  duty 
for  six  months ;  but  the  Bishop  refused  until  such 
time  as  Mr.  Greenwell  should  (as  he  expressed  it) 
"  obey  the  law,"  i.e.  conform  to  the  dicta  of  the 
Judicial  Committee  of  Privy  Council.  This  was 
in  November.  In  the  preceding  April,  objection 
having  been  made  by  certain  persons  to  statues 
of  the  Blessed  Virgin  and  the  four  Latin  Doctors, 
which  had  been  erected  as  ornaments  to  the  porch 
of  Bristol  Cathedral,  with  the  consent  of  the  Dean 
and  Chapter,  the  Dean  (Dr.  Eliot,  of  whom  we  shall 
hear  more  anon  in  connexion  with  the  proceedings 
of  certain  Dissenters)  ordered  their  removal ;  and 
they  were  removed  accordingly. 

The  circumstances  which  we  have  to  bring 
before  our  readers  now  will  recall  those  which  had 
brought  so  peculiar  a  notoriety  upon  the  parish 
of  St.  George's-in-tlxa-East  about  seventeen  years 
before.  The  Church -of  St.  James,  Hatcham,  Dept- 
ford,  was  built  about  1845  by  the  Eev.  A.  K.  B. 
Granville,  who  became  its  first  incumbent.  The 
patronage  of  the  benefice  was  purchased  afterwards 
by  E.  Tooth,  Esq.,  who,  after  the  living  had  become 
vacant,  presented  his  brother,  the  Eev.  Arthur 
Tooth,  in  1868.  Under  the  new  incumbent,  both  the 
fabric  of  the  church  and  the  services  inside  were 
improved,  and  the  spiritual  life  of  the  congregation 
seemed  to  advance.  Mr.  Tooth  made  the  whole 
church  free  and  open,  content  with  the  £150  per 

332  REV.   A.    TOOTH    PROSECUTED. 

annum  given  by  the  Ecclesiastical  Commissioners, 
and  a  monthly  collection,  besides  what  private 
means  he  had  of  his  own. 

For  about  eight  years  Mr.  Tooth  had  been  work- 
ing as  priest  of  the  parish,  in  harmony  with  his 
congregation,  until  a  person  named  Sanders  came 
into  the  parish.  This  man  appears  to  have  formed 
what  was  called  a  "  Parish  Committee,"  which, 
being  practically  in  league  with  the  "  Church  Asso- 
ciation," aimed  at  hindering  the  Vicar's  work  in 
every  way,  in  the  interests  of  Protestantism.  And 
in  the  spring  of  1876  the  "Church  Association" 
instituted  proceedings  against  Mr.  Tooth,  under 
the  Public  Worship  Eegulation  Act.*  The  three 
persons  who  posed  as  aggrieved  parishioners  were 
Eobert  Hudson,  Samuel  Gardiner,  and  Eobert  Gun- 
ston ;  of  whom  one  admitted  to  Mr.  Tooth  that  the 
good  offices  of  the  Evangelical  clergyman  of  his  own 
choice  failed  to  satisfy  him,  and  that  he  found  the 
exhortations  of  a  Wesleyan  minister  more  to  the 

Eighteen  charges  were  brought  against  Mr. 
Tooth,  who  was  given  to  understand  that  if  he 
did  not  accept  the  Bishop's  decision  thereon  the 
case  would  be  sent  to  Lord  Penzance. |  It  was 
asserted  that  Mr.  Tooth  had  adopted  the  following 
practices  :§ — 

A  procession  from  the  vestry  to  the  Communion- 

*  The  proceedings  "  were  guided  by  the  Council  of  the  Associa- 
tion." Church  Association  Monthly  Intelligencer,  AprU  2,  1877, 
p.  107. 

t  Letter  of  Mr.  Tooth  to  the  Bishop  of  Rochester  (Dr.  Thomas 
Legh  Claughton),  in  Church  Times  of  March  24,  1876. 

X  Church  Times,  March  10,  1876,  p.  120. 

§  The  particulars  are  taken  from  the  Church  Association 
Monthly  Intelligencer  for  1876. 


table,  upon  which  or  the  ledge  immediately  above 
which  candles  have  just  been  lighted.  This  proces- 
sion consists  of  boys  in  cassocks  carrying  incense, 
lighted  candles,  and  a  crucifix  on  a  pole,  and  is 
attended  by  Mr.  Tooth  himself,  or  by  his  curate  in 
an  alb,  girdle,  amice,  stole,  and  a  chasuble,  with  a 
cap  called  a  biretta  on  his  head.  .  .  .  The  different 
vessels  are  censed.  The  biretta  is  taken  off  the 
head  and  laid  with  ceremony  on  the  table.  Water 
is  mixed  with  the  wine.  The  prayer  of  conse- 
cration is  said  with  the  back  of  the  celebrant 
turned  to  the  congregation.  The  celebrant  kneels 
at  certain  parts  of  it,  and  afterwards  elevates  the 
sacred  elements  above  his  head.  He  makes  the 
sign  of  the  cross  in  the  air  towards  the  congrega- 
tion ;  the  Agnus  Dei  is  sung  ;  the  great  bell  of  the 
church  is  tolled ;  two  boys  hold  up  lighted  candles 
high  in  the  air  and  retire  ;  and  the  Holy  Commu- 
nion is  then  received  either  by  the  celebrant  himself 
alone  or  by  himself  and  one  other  person. 

The  case  was  sent  to  Lord  Penzance,  who  sat  on 
the  13th  of  July  to  hear  it.  And  on  the  18th  he 
gave  judgment;  ordering  a  monition  to  issue, 
bidding  Mr.  Tooth  to  refrain  from  these  various 
practices  in  future,  and  to  pay  the  costs.  At  the 
same  time  the  crucifix  on  the  beam  crossing  the 
nave  of  the  church,  and  the  altar  in  the  south  aisle 
were  ordered  by  his  Lordship  to  be  removed. 

Lord  Penzance's  monition  was  served  on  Mr. 
Tooth  on  the  29th  of  July.  Mr.  Tooth  paid  no 
regard  to  it ;  in  consequence  of  which  application 
was  made  for  an  inliibition  to  enforce  obedience. 
Mr.  Tooth  was  cited  to  appear  before  Lord  Pen- 
zance on  the  2nd  of  December,  1876.     Not  recog- 

334  MOB  AT  ST.  James's,  hatcham. 

nising  any  spiritual  authority  as  possessed  by  Lord 
Penzance,  he  did  not  appear  ;  and  sentence  of  sus- 
pension was  passed.  The  sentence  was  not  served, 
however,  until  Sunday,  the  17th  of  December. 
Wlien  it  was  served,  Mr.  Tooth  ignored  it ;  and 
on  that  day  fortnight,  the  31st,  the  church  was 
invaded  by  an  organised  mob,  which  sang  comic 
songs  in  the  course  of  the  service  and  hooted  the 
congregation  as  they  left.  One  member  of  the 
"  Church  Association "  was  among  them  whose 
countenance  betrayed  anything  but  displeasure  at 
what  was  going  on ;  *  and  who  thus  manifested 
himself  a  true  follower  of  some  of  the  old  Puri- 
tans.f  After  the  service  the  mob  was  harangued 
by  "  Church  Association "  agitators  outside,  and 
urged  to  violence.  "  A  pretty  set  of  fellows  !  "  one 
of  these  agitators  was  afterwards  heard  to  say  ; 
"  they  didn't  half  do  what  they  were  paid  for." 
The  result  of  this  was,  that  after  the  Evening  Service 
it  was  with  difficulty  that  the  clergy  could  get 
safely  to  the  vicarage  adjoining.  J 

*  Letter  in  Church  Times  of  January  5,  1877,  p.  4. 

t  Foxe  speaks  of  some  Protestants  as  mocking  Catholics  for 
attending  church.     Acts  and  Monuments,  vol.  viii.  p.  382. 

\  Church  Times,  January  5,  1877.  It  was  subsequently  stated 
{Church  Times,  August  26,  1887,  p.  675,  vol.  iii.)  that  the  leaders 
of  the  rioting  invited  a  working-man  to  join  their  committee 
who  was  a  member  of  the  Church  of  England  Working  Men's 
Association,  then  in  its  infancy.  Possibly  those  who  invited  him 
had  never  heard  of  the  Association,  or  did  not  know  its  princi- 
ples. Be  that  as  it  may,  however,  invited  he  was.  "  He  was  a 
shrewd  fellow,  who  knew  how  to  hold  his  tongue  ;  and  having 
been  invited,  without  any  sinister  action  of  his  own,  to  join  the 
enemy,  he  consented,  on  the  principle  that  all  was  fair  in  love  or 
in  war ;  and  in  this  case  it  was  decidedly  war.  Of  coiurse  every- 
thing which  was  arranged  by  the  rioting  party  was  known  to 
him,  and  he  duly  reported  it  at  head-quarters.      Consequently  on 

PAID    RIOTERS.  3,'^5 

In  order  to  exclude  tlie  mob  on  the  follow- 
ing Sunday,  tlie  churchwardens  determined  to 
admit  the  regular  congregation  by  ticket.  The 
enemy  became  aware  of  this,  and  on  the  Monday- 
morning  following  the  day  of  riot,  an  order  was 
given  to  a  firm  of  stationers  for  three  hundred  fac- 
similes of  the  churchwardens'  ticket.  Fortunately, 
however,  the  order  was  entrusted  to  the  same  house 
which  the  churchwardens  themselves  had  employed, 
and  the  trick  in  consequence  failed.  Next  Sunday 
(the  7th  of  January,  1877),  the  mob  broke  down  a 
barrier  which  the  churchwardens  had  had  erected, 
invaded  the  churchyard,  and  made  a  noise  at  the 
church-doors,  by  kicking  at  them  and  otherwise, 
while  Divine  Service  was  proceeding.  And  Mdien 
the  congregation  were  departing,  the  same  insulting 
and  abominable  language  M^as  used  towards  them 
which  had  been  used  before.  Two  ladies  were  spat 
upon,  and  one  of  the  crowd  was  heard  to  say,  "  We 
have  lots  of  money,  and  we  will  get  hundreds  of 
men  from  Deptford  to  come  next  Sunday,  and  then 
we  will  never  rest  until  we  throng  the  church, 
smash  everything  in  the  chancel,  and  pull  down 
everything  in  the  church."*  The  wife  of  one 
afterwards  said,  "  My  husband  did  well  yesterday  : 
he  got  a  sovereign  for  rowing  at  the  church,  and 

each  following  Sunday,  steps  were  taken  to  checkmate  the  designs 
of  the  rioters.  After  a  time  the  Protestant  body  discovered  that 
there  must  be  some  enemy  in  the  camp,  and  it  was  proposed  that 
an  oath  of  secrecy  should  be  taken  by  their  committee.  Of  course 
the  Church  of  England  Working  Men's  Society  man  could  not 
do  this,  and  he  excused  himself  by  saying  that  such  action  was 
illegal,  and  that  as  he  was  not  going  to  lay  himself  open  to  prosecu- 
tion he  should  retire  from  the  committee.  But  the  worst  was 
over  then  as  regarded  the  rioting  in  the  church." 
*  Church  Times,  January  12,  1877. 


SO  did  all  the  men,  and  the  boys  a  shillmg  each." 
When  next  Sunday  came,  however,  the  police 
hindered  the  accomplishment  of  the  threat.  The 
church  was  not  opened  at  all,  the  Bishop  having 
ordered  it  to  be  closed  :  and  the  mob  which  had 
assembled  was  dispersed  by  a  heavy  rain.  On  the 
21st  also  the  church  remained  shut  up. 

Meanwhile  Mr.  Tooth  was  doing  his  duty  as 
best  he  could  under  the  circumstances  :  stedfastly 
refusing  to  recognise  the  Public  Worship  Eegula- 
tion  Act,  or  the  pretended  spiritual  authority  of 
Lord  Penzance's  court,  in  any  way ;  and  refusing 
to  obey  the  Bishop  also,  when  that  right  reverend 
Father  acted  merely  as  Lord  Penzance's  tipstaff. 
On  these  accounts  he  was  signified,  on  Saturday, 
the  13th  of  January,  for  contempt  of  court,  arrested 
on  the  afternoon  of  Monday,  the  22nd,  and  im- 
prisoned in  Horsemonger  Gaol.  He  was,  however, 
released  again  on  the  17th  of  February  ;  the  pro- 
moters being  in  a  manner  compelled  by  public 
opinion  to  apply  for  his  release,  and  doing  so  un- 
willingly enough. 

The  Bishop  tried  to  get  one  clergyman  after 
another  to  do  duty  in  Mr.  Tooth's  cliurch.  He 
had  in  the  previous  December  revoked  the  licence 
of  the  Eev.  WiUiam  Henry  Browne,  Mr.  Tooth's 
curate,  and  had  appointed  in  his  place  the  Eev.  Dr. 
Gee,  one  of  the  episcopal  chaplains,  whose  attempts 
to  intrude  into  the  church  Mr.  Tooth  had  success- 
fully resisted.  The  Eev.  Eichard  Chambres  was 
then  appointed;  but  Mr.  Tooth  refused  him  the 
keys  of  the  church,  whereupon  he  gave  up  the 
matter  as  a  bad  job.     The  curacy  was  then  offered 

AN   INTRUDER.  337 

by  the  Bishop  to  a  clergyman  of  the  name  of  Peake  ; 
who  dechned  it.  At  last  the  office  of  intruder  was 
accepted  by  a  clergyman  of  the  name  of  Dale  ;  who 
thus  ijave  occasion  for  the  lines — 


"  What  lofty  Peake  looked  down  on  with  disdain, 
Low-lying  Dale  was  but  too  glad  to  gain." 

This  gentleman  could  not  get  the  keys  of  the 
church  from  anybody ;  for  vicar  and  church- 
wardens were  of  one  mind  with  regard  to  him.  A 
locksmith  was  brought,  and  attempted  to  pick  the 
locks,  but  failed.  Finally,  a  crowbar  was  brought 
to  bear  upon  the  sacred  fabric  ;  and  some  masonry 
having  been  therewith  displaced,  an  entrance  was 
effected ;  and  the  intruder  said  Mattins  and  LitauA^ 
in  the  church  on  Sunday,  February  25.  After 
the  Litany  a  large  number  of  the  congregation,  not 
wishing  to  be  present  at  Mr.  Dale's  celebration  of 
the  Eucharist,  rose  from  their  seats  to  go ;  and 
about  two-thirds  of  these  had  left  the  church,  when 
several  members  of  the  Protestant  League  closed 
and  bolted  the  western  doors,  thus  preventing 
further  egress  until,  on  the  arrival  of  Mr.  Croom, 
one  of  the  churchwardens,  they  were  partially 
opened  again.  Mr.  Croom,  however,  was  seized  by 
the  throat  and  thrown  down  the  steps  ;  after  which 
the  doors  were  again  fastened,  and  the  Catholics 
inside  compelled  to  remain  at  a  service  which  they 
deemed  sacrilegious. 

On  Saturday  night,  March   24,  or  early  on  the 
following  morning,  certain  paintings  on  the  chancel- 
screen  were   daubed   over  with  paint   of  a  dark 
slate-colour.     That  Sunday  was  the  Sunday  before 
n.  23 

338  MR.    TOOTH    RETURNS, 

Easter ;  and  apparently  in  the  following  week  a 
person  named  Fry,  one  of  Mr.  Tooth's  opponents, 
was  put  into  the  office  of  churchwarden  ;  the  other 
churchwarden  being  Mr.  Webb,  appointed  by  Mr. 
Tooth.  When  the  Bishop  came  to  do  duty  himself 
at  St.  James's,  in  the  absence  of  Mr.  Tooth,  on  Good 
Friday,  he  saw  Fry,  Holloway,  and  two  other  Low- 
Churchmen  in  the  vestry  after  the  Morning  Service, 
and  shook  hands  with  them,  saying,  "  God  bless 

Mr.  Tooth  himself  had  gone  abroad  for  the  sake 
of  his  health,  and  had  written  to  the  church- 
wardens recommending  the  congregation  to  dis- 
continue their  attendance  at  St.  James's  Church  as 
lonsf  as  it  remained  in  the  hands  of  an  intruder. 
On  the  Eve  of  Ascension  Day,  however,  he  returned 
to  England,  and  on  Ascension  Day,  in  the  evening, 
he  came  to  his  vicarage,  and  wrote  to  Mr.  Webb. 
We  shall  give  his  letter,  and  the  narrative  of  what 
followed,  as  they  were  communicated  to  the  Church 
Times : — * 

"  St.  James's  Vicarage,  Hatcham, 
"  May  12,  1877. 

"  My  dear  Churchwarden, — I  have  returned  to 
London — (1)  to  renew  my  claim  to  my  position  as 
the  lawful  and  canonically  instituted  vicar  of  this 
parish  ;  (2)  to  assert  that  all  services  which  have 
been  conducted  here  since  my  removal  from  my 
parish  are  schismatical ;  and  (3)  that  the  various 
appointments  to  the  cure  of  souls  which  have  been 
forced  upon  my  parishioners,  from  the  nature  of 
the  case,  must  be  null  and  void.     Will  you  kindly 

•  Church  Times,  May  18,  1877. 


inform  the  communicants  of  the  congregation, 
as  far  as  you  have  the  opportunity  of  doing  so, 
that  it  is  my  intention  on  Sunday  (the  first  after 
my  return)  to  celebrate  tlie  Holy  Connnunion  at 
8  o'clock. 

"  I  wish  it  to  be  understood  that  I  reserve  it  as 
•a  matter  for  my  own  discretion  to  say  when  I 
shall  repeat  my  ministrations — not  elsewhere  in 
my  parish — but  in  my  own  pulpit  and  at  my  own 

"  Believe  me  to  remain,  my  dear  Churchwarden, 
yours  faithfully  and  affectionately, 

"Arthur  Tooth." 

"  It  would  have  been  the  merest  affectation  of 
■confidence  for  Mr.  Tooth  to  have  communicated 
with  the  other  churchwarden,  Mr.  Fry,  for  he  has 
left  no  room  for  doubt  as  to  his  mind  and  attitude 
by  repeated  acts  of  hostility  from  before  the  com- 
mencement of  the  prosecution  until  the  other  day, 
when  he  broke  up  and  removed  the  altar  in  the 
■side-cha|)el,  making  this  use  of  the  opportunity 
afforded  to  him  by  Mr.  Dale's  having  entrusted  him 
with  the  keys  that  he  might  open  the  church  for  the 
clergyman  who  was  to  take  the  duty  on  the  follow- 
ing Sunday.  But  if  he  was  not  to  be  trusted  others 
were ;  and  the  news  was  spread  abroad  amongst 
^  number  of  ihe  communicants  and  other  friends 
with  a  rapidity  and  secrecy  worthy  of  the  occa- 
sion ;  and  by  8  o'clock  on  Sunday  morning  a  laro-e 
congregation  had  assembled  —  the  body  of  the 
church  being  well  filled.  The  bell  having  been 
rung  for  five  minutes  according  to  the  old  custom, 



the  Vicar  entered  the  chancel  and  proceeded  to  the- 
altar  attended  by  another  priest  who  acted  as 
server,  while  a  lay  assistant  occupied  one  of  the 
choir  stalls.  Wlien  Mr.  Tooth  had  placed  the 
chalice  on  the  altar,  he  and  all  the  people  recited 
the  fifty-first  Psalm.  But  for  this,  and  the  inter- 
ruption to  be  mentioned  presently,  one  might  have 
thought  it  was  some  greater  '  White '  Sunday  in 
last  year,  for  one  hardly  observed  the  absence  of 
the  vesper  lights,  candlesticks,  and  of  the  altar- 
frontal  ;  and  the  blackened  panels  of  the  rood- 
screen  were  not  visible  except  to  the  foremost  rows 
of  kneeling  worshippers.  The  Eucharistic  lights 
burning  on  either  side  of  the  altar-cross,  the  rich 
festal  vestments  which  were  used,  the  bell  tolled 
at  the  Sanctus  and  at  the  Elevation,  and  the 
devotion  of  the  people,  all  served  to  carry  us  back 
to  the  happy  days  gone  by,  and  to  mufile  the  re- 
membrance of  the  sacrilegious  communions  and 
the  open  irreverence  and  profanity  which  had  lately 
desecrated  the  house  of  God. 

"  The  sound  of  the  bell  before  the  service  pro- 
duced different  effects  upon  different  people.  A 
member  of  the  old  congregation,  who  had  been 
overlooked  in  the  issuing  of  the  notices,  on  hear- 
ing it  exclaimed,  '  That  is  no  Protestant  ring ! ' 
and  hastened  to  the  church  to  receive  Communion 
there  once  more  from  the  Vicar's  hands,  instead  of 
making  a  journey  to  St.  Peter's.  Mr.  Fry,  however, 
having  no  notion  of  an  early  Communion,  was  sleep- 
ing the  sleep  of  the  true  Protestant,  whose  ideas 
of  the  sabbatical  nature  of  the  Sunday  are  strongly 
developed  in  a  particular  direction.     Wakened  by 


the  bell,  he  skipped  out  of  bed  with  uncalculating 
precipitation,  and  sent  his  maidservant  to  the 
church  to  ask  if  there  was  any  service,  and  who 
was  the  minister.  As  he  heard  from  her  nothinsf 
tending  to  soothe  him,  he  hurried  up  to  the 
church  himself,  completing  his  toilet  on  the  way. 
Peeping  in  through  the  curtains  at  the  west  door, 
he  saw  the  Vicar  turning  to  the  people  to  give 
the  absolution,  and  he  bounded  up  the  nave,  fol- 
lowed by  the  two  policemen  he  had  brought  with 
him.  His  progress  was  arrested  by  the  chancel 
gates,  which  were  closed  against  him  ;  the  congre- 
gation rose  to  a  man,  and  many  rushed  forward  to 
the  chancel  steps  on  which  he  was  standing. 

"  Thus  balked,  he  called  out  in  a  loud  tone, '  Mr. 
Webb  !  Mr.  Webb  !  Mr.  Webb ! '  and  Mr.  Webb, 
who  was  already  close  to  him,  replied,  '  I  am  here, 
Mr.  Fry,  to  do  my  duty.'  Then  Mr.  Fry  said  to 
the  police,  '  I  give  Mr.  Tooth  in  charge  ;  take  that 
man  into  custody.'  Mr.  Webb  turned  to  the  police 
and  said,  '  You'll  do  nothing  of  the  kind ; '  where- 
upon Mr.  Fry  said  to  his  colleague,  '  You  won't 
support  my  action  ? '  and  received  for  an  answer, 
'  No  !  and  you  cannot  do  anything  without  me : 
one  churchwarden  cannot  act  by  himself ' — a  state- 
ment which  was  endorsed  by  another  gentleman.* 
Mr.  Fry  then  turned  to  Mr.  Tooth  and  cried  out  with 
a  loud  voice,  '  Mr.  Tooth,  will  you  speak  to  me  ? 
Mr.  Tooth,  you  are  prohibited  from  officiating,  and 
I,  as  churchwarden,  call  upon  you  to  desist.'     Mr. 

*  And  it  was  intimated  by  another  gentleman  that  though 
Mr.  Fry  must  not  attempt  any  violence,  the  police  were  welcome 
to  arrest  Mr.  Tooth  if  they  pleased. 


"tooth,  however,  neither  spoke  nor  moved,  but 
stood  calmly  waiting  throughout  the  whole  scene. 
As  Mr.  Fry  was  very  boisterous,  even  after  he  had 
found  that  he  was  helpless,  Mr.  Webb  told  him,, 
'  If  you  persist  in  interrupting  the  service,  I  shall 
have  to  give  you  into  custody  for  brawling,'  where- 
upon he  went  away  with  the  police,  but  returned 
presently  with  his  friend  Mr.  Sanders,  one  of  his. 
sidesmen,  with  whom  he  stood  near  the  rood-screen, 
commenting  in  an  audible  tone  on  what  was  taking 
place,  and  noting,  let  us  hope,  the  reverent  de- 
meanour of  the  hundred  and  odd  who  received  the 
Blessed  Sacrament. 

"  The  scene,  after  the  first  moment  of  alarm,  was 
not  so  tumultuous  as  might  be  supposed ;  for  when 
it  was  clear  that  there  was  no  fear  of  a  sudden 
rush  at  the  Vicar,  and  that  the  police  were  ready 
to  listen  to  reason  and  not  to  Mr.  Fry,  all  but  a 
small  group  who  stood  round  the  chancel  steps 
obeyed  the  request  of  Mr.  Layman  to  resume  their 
places ;  and  when  the  disturbance  was  over,  the 
Vicar  pronounced  the  absolution  just  as  if  no 
disagreeable  occurrence  had  happened,  and  the 
service  was  proceeded  with  to  the  end  without  any 
tokens  of  excitement,  though,  as  may  be  imagined,, 
not  a  few  found  considerable  difficulty  in  repress- 
ing their  conflicting  emotions  of  sorrow,  love,  and 

"  '  0  passi  graviora  !     Dabit  Dens  his  ql^oque  finem. 
Durate,  et  vosmet  rebus  servate  secundis.' 

"  On  Mr.  Tooth's  returning  to  the  sacristy  to 
unvest,    Mr.    Fry    followed,   with   his  friend,  and 


addressed  the  Vicar,  saying,  '  I  protest  against 
your  being  here ; '  to  which  the  Vicar  answered 
'  Yes  ! '  '  You  have  been  inhibited  -from  perform- 
ing any  service  in  this  church.'  '  Yes ! '  again 
replied  the  Vicar.  '  I  protest  against  your  ac- 
tion ; '  to  which  Mr.  Tooth  again  simply  answered 
'  Yes  ! '  Some  eight  or  ten  members  of  the  con- 
gregation had  followed  Mr.  Fry  into  the  sacristy, 
and  now  seemed  disposed  to  resent  his  interference  ; 
whereupon  Mr.  Webb,  with  a  praiseworthy  sense 
of  fairness,  interposed,  saying  that  Mr.  Fry  was 
perfectly  within  his  right  in  making  his  protest. 

"  The  vestments,  &c.,  which  had  been  brought  in 
for  the  service  were  removed,  and  the  bulk  of  the 
congregation  left  the  church,  offerincf  their  congfra- 
tulations  and  welcomes  to  the  Vicar  as  he  walked 
along  the  path  they  lined  to  the  vicarage,  which 
he  entered  with  his  old  friend  and  churchwarden, 
Mr.  Croom.  A  few  members  of  the  conscrecration 
remained  in  the  church,  but  as  soon  as  Mr.  Tooth 
heard  of  it  he  gave  directions  that  they  should  at 
once  leave  quietly  and  orderly.  He  had  no  wish, 
he  said,  to  pursue  an  advantage  ;  the  service  was 
complete  in  itself,  and  had  effected  all  that  was 
required.  Mr.  Fry,  having  locked  up  the  church, 
hurried  off  to  obtain  some  policemen,  and  the  news 
of  what  had  happened  spread  rapidly  among  Mr. 
Fry's  friends  and  supporters  of  the  discredited 
'  Protestant  League,'  some  of  whom  were  over- 
heard saying  they  only  'wished  they  had  known 
this  before.'  At  eleven  o'clock  a  schismatical  ser- 
vice was  conducted  by  a  Mr.  M'Bean,  who  is  said 
to  have  come  down  at  the  pressing  request  of  the 


Bishop,  but  who  appears  to  think  no  new  glory  of 
this  world  is  likely  to  attach  to  his  name  in  conse- 
quence of  his  compliance.  Some  thirty  policemen 
were  on  duty  round  the  church,  and  the  most 
valiant  of  the  '  Protestant  Leao:ue '  stood  about 
the  doors,  declaring  that  they  would  not  allow 
Mr.  Tooth  to  enter  the  building.  Any  occupation 
is  good  for  little  wits,  and  we  do  not  grudge  them 
their  little  display — but  we  are  sorry  for  the  un- 
fortunate policemen  who  M^ere  there  without  reason, 
for  Mr.  Tooth  had  no  intention  of  going  to  the 
church,  as  his  work  was  accomplished.  Night  and 
day,  up  to  the  time  of  our  writing,  the  police  have 
been  watching  the  church,  on  whose  walls  they 
now  and  then  gaze  as  if  they  wished  some  good 
(or  bad)  angel  would  fly  away  with  it,  and  plant  it 
near  the  bishop  who  was  wafted  away  to  the  desert 
of  Sahara. 

"  By  w^ay  of  a  piece  of  senseless  spite,  which 
could  in  no  way  injure  the  Vicar,  nor  alter  the  effect 
of  his  action,  the  Protestants,  with  characteristic 
*  simplicity,'  began  on  Sunday  to  damage  the  con- 
fessional ;  but  were  stopped  before  they  had  gone 
far  in  their  congenial  work  of  destroying  what 
they  do  not  understand. 

"  On  Tuesday  night,  some  of  Mr.  Fry's  party  went 
into  the  church  and  continued  his  work,  the  demo- 
lition of  the  side-altar,  using  its  pieces  for  boarding 
up  one  of  the  windows,  and  on  Wednesday  a  party 
of  workmen  brought  long  ladders  and,  as  it  turns 
out,  threw  down  the  crucifix  from  the  rood-beam. 
It  came  down  with  a  great  crash,  which  startled 
the    people    in   the    neighbouring   houses,  and   it 

ME.    WEBB.  345 

was,  of  course,  broken.  That  the  intention  was  to 
break  it  is  clear,  from  the  use  of  ladders  instead  of 
scaffolding  ;  and  Mr.  Fry  will  have  to  answer  for 
this,  as  well  as  for  tearing  the  side-altar  to  pieces. 
His  conduct,  on  the  one  side,  stands  in  strong  con- 
trast to  the  dignified  moderation  of  Mr.  Webb  on 
the  other  side.  The  latter  gentleman,  though  he 
may  be  howled  at  by  the  insolent  and  aggressive 
faction  which  is  dominant  at  Hatcham,  must  be 
admitted  to  have  behaved  with  the  utmost  mode- 
ration, and  while  Churchmen  are  bound  to  thank 
him  for  his  courage  and  his  readiness  and  efficiency, 
he  is  not  really  open  to  censure  from  thoughtful 
people  on  the  other  side,  unless,  indeed,  to  cen- 
sure for  holding  an  unpopular  creed.  His  position 
clearly  is  that  the  Vicar,  as  freeholder,  has  a  right 
of  entry  to  the  church,  and  that  while  it  was  no 
affair  of  his  to  '  sanction '  the  service  (as  he  is  falsely 
reported  to  have  declared  he  did),  it  was  his  duty 
to  protect  from  interruption  a  service  conducted  by 
the  Vicar,  who  had  d.  'prima  facie  right  to  conduct 
it,  and  who,  if  he  were  wrong,  could  be  dealt  with 
by  the  law. 

"  On  Thursday  morning  Mr.  Fry,  who  has  the 
keys  of  the  church,  refused  to  give  Mr.  Webb 
access,  although  he  knows  by  experience  that  Mr. 
Webb  would  have  returned  them  if  he  received 
them  on  that  understanding." 

A  meeting  of  parishioners  was  announced  by 
the  Protestant  League,  of  which  Lord  Oranmore 
and  Browne  was  president,  to  be  held  on  the  18th 
of  May.  "  At  half-past  six  o'clock,"  says  a  reporter 
or  correspondent  of  the  Church  Times,  "  the  time 


announced  for  the  commencement  of  the  proceed- 
ings, not  twenty  persons  were  present,  and  a  start 
was  not  managed  for  nearly  an  hour  later.  The 
resolutions,  we  learn  from  the  Standard,  were 
declared  carried  without  putting  to  the  contrary. 
To  show  the  great  interest  manifested  by  the 
parishioners  in  the  cause  of  Protestantism,  we  may 
remark  that  four  out  of  the  five  speakers  were 
non-parishioners,  including  Mr.  McClure,  of  Green- 
wich. Mr.  James  Eoss,  of  Bow,  and  secretary  of 
a  Conservative  association  of  working  men,  was. 
very  conspicuous  and  energetic  in  his  efforts  in  the 
cause  of  the  '  poor  suffering  parishioners.'  "  * 

On  the  12th  of  July,  1877,  the  Court  of  Queen's. 
Bench  granted  a  rule  nisi  to  show  cause  why  the 
proceedings  against  Mr.  Tooth  should  not  be 
quashed  on  the  ground  of  a  technical  informality ; 
the  Judge  having  been  enjoined  in  the  Archbishop's^ 
requisition  to  hear  the  case  in  London,  Westmin- 
ster, or  the  Diocese  of  Eochester ;  whereas  he  had 
heard  it  in  Lambeth  Palace,  which  was  within 
neither  of  those  localities.  The  case  was  heard 
before  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  (Lord  Coleridge), 
Mr.  Justice  Mellor,  and  Mr.  Justice  Lush,  on  the 
19th  of  November  ;  and  the  Court  decided  unani- 
mously that  the  prohibition  must  issue.  Prohibi- 
tion was  issued  accordingly  to  the  promoters  of 
the  suit,  and  to  Lord  Penzance,  against  taking  any 
further  steps  in  the  matter. 

It  will  already  have  been  evident  that  in  the 
case  of  St.  James's,  Hatcham,  the  hatred  and 
malice  of  the  Low-Church  party  was  directed  as 

*  Church  Times,  May  25,  1877. 

PEKJUEY   OF   A   JURY.  347 

much  against  the  fabric  and  furniture  of  the  sa- 
cred edifice  as  against  the  priest  who  ministered 
in  it.  A  man  named  John  ElUot,  a  carpenter, 
and  member  of  the  Protestant  League,  thinking  one 
day  that  he  would  hke  to  bear  a  hand  in  the  pious 
business,  broke  up  the  confessional-box.  For  this 
offence  he  was  prosecuted  by  one  of  the  church- 
wardens, and  tried  at  the  Old  Bailey,  in  the  month 
of  August,  before  Mr.  Commissioner  Kerr  and  a 
jury.  Before,  however,  the  case  for  the  prosecu- 
tion had  been  fully  stated  the  jury  interposed,  and 
intimated  that  on  the  sole  ground  that  the  confes- 
sional-box had  been  shaken  by  other  persons 
before,  so  as  to  have  become  already  rickety,  they 
had  made  up  their  minds  to  acquit  the  prisoner  ; 
whereupon  Mr.  Commissioner  Kerr  had  no  alter- 
native save  to  suggest  that  the  prosecution  should 
be  withdrawn.  This  bold  perjury  on  the  part  of 
the  jury  was  designated  by  the  Daily  Telegraph  as 
"  A  very  significant  vindication  of  Protestant  prin- 

In  the  month  of  November  Mr.  Tooth  wrote  to 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (who,  since  the 
departure  of  Bishop  Thomas  Legli  Claughton  to 
the  newly-founded  See  of  St.  Alban's,  and  before 
the  consecration  of  Mr.  Thorold  to  the  See  of 
Eochester  in  its  new  shape,  had,  as  Metropolitan 
of  the  province,  taken  charge  of  the  latter  diocese), 
intimating  his  intention  of  resigning  the  benefice  of 
St.  James's.  The  late  decision  of  the  Queen's  Bench 
in  his  favour  had  placed  it  within  Mr.  Tooth's 
power  to  bring  actions  at  law  against  various 
persons  at  whose  hands  he  had  sufiered  injury. 


He  could  have  prosecuted  Bisliop  Thomas  Legh 
Claughtoii,  and  all  those  clergymen  who  had  been 
intruded  into  his  church,  for  trespass  on  his  free- 
hold. He  could  have  prosecuted  the  three  "  ag- 
grieved parishioners "  (so  called)  and  Lord  Pen- 
zance for  false  imprisonment.  And  he  could  have 
prosecuted  also  the  parishioners'  churchwarden, 
and  perhaps  the  intruding  clergyman  also,  for  the 
damage  done  to  the  fabric  and  furniture  of  the 
church,  whereof  they  had  been  either  custodians 
or  in  the  place  of  such  ;  wdiicli  damage  might  have 
included — we  are  not  aware  whether  it  did  actually 
include — the  removal,  on  the  14th  of  November,  of 
an  oaken  triptych  from  over  the  altar — by  whom, 
nobody  professed  to  know.  All  these  rights,  how- 
ever, and  the  compensatory  damages  which  he 
might  have  obtained  if  he  had  pressed  for  them, 
Mr.  Tooth  freely  waived.  He  resigned  his  bene- 
fice, and  retired  to  the  orphanage  of  which  he  had 
the  superintendence. 

The  Low-Church  enemies  at  Hatcham,  however, 
had  not  done  with  St.  James's  Church,  if  they  had 
lost  their  gripe  of  Mr.  Tooth.  Li  January  1878 
Mr.  Fry,  the  parishioners'  churchwarden,  instituted 
proceedings  in  the  Consistory  Court  of  Eochester 
for  the  removing  of  the  screens,  the  lowering  of 
the  altar,  and  effecting  other  injuries  to  the  in- 
terior of  the  building.  His  petition  was  granted, 
and,  oddly  enough,  on  the  day  of  the  Epiphany, 
by  Dr.  Eobertson,  the  chancellor  of  the  diocese. 
An  appeal  was  made  on  the  23rd  of  March  to 
Lord  Penzance,  at  the  instance  of  a  Mr.  Bradford ; 
two  other  parishioners,  Mr.  Bullard  and  Mr.  Nash, 


having  been  allowed  to  intervene.  But  Lord 
Penzance  decided  that  the  beautiful  oak  screen  in 
the  south  transept,  v^hich  screen  vs^as  a  memorial 
of  Mrs.  Tooth,  the  wife  of  the  patron,  together 
with  the  chancel-gates  and  some  of  the  altar-steps, 
must  be  removed. 

In  the  Februaiy  of  the  same  year  there  was  an 
organised  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  leaders  of  the 
Protestant  League  to  disturb  the  Eev.  Malcolm 
McCoU  (not  he  who  was  afterwards  Canon  of 
Eipon),  Mr.  McColl  having  been  placed  in  charo-e 
of  the  parish,  with  a  view  to  his  becoming  even- 
tually vicar.  Some  men  and  boys  who  occupied 
prominent  places  in  the  church  persisted  in  read- 
ing, in  their  ordinary  conversational  manner,  but 
in  loud  tones,  the  Amens  and  responses  while  the 
same  were  being  sung  by  the  choir.*  And  the 
ruffianism  was  as  strong  as  ever  a  twelvemonth 
later,  when,  the  Eev.  Henry  Aston  Walker  having 
been  appointed  to  the  vicarage,  the  parochial 
girls'  school  was  invaded,  at  the  close  of  the 
teaching,  on  Sunday,  January  12,  1879,  by  a  ^ano- 
of  twenty  or  thirty  roughs,  headed  by  Messrs.  Fry, 
Turner,  and  others.  These  men  then  knocked 
down  one  of  the  lady-teachers,  came  into  the  boys' 
school,  assaulted  Mr.  William  Collins,  the  superin- 
tendent, took  down  a  picture  of  the  Crucifixion 
and  trampled  upon  it.  And  on  the  foUowincr 
Sunday,  which  was  the  first  on  which  Mr.  Walker 
was  to  officiate  in  the  church  after  his  formal 
admission  to  the  living,  Mr.  Sanders  asked  him  to 
remove  the  cross  and  candlesticks  from  the  altar- 

*  John  Bull,  cited  in  Church  Times  of  Feb.  22,  1878,  p.  102. 


ledge,  and  on  liis  refusal  went  up  and  removed 
them  himself.  The  same  afternoon  the  mob  as- 
sembled before  the  school-room  doors,  and  the 
police  were  sent  for,  ostensibly  to  keep  order ;  but 
those  functionaries  allowed  entrance  to  the  lead- 
ino-  rioters,  and  refused  it  to  the  teachers  ;  one  of 
these  latter  being  thus  exhorted  by  a  constable  : — 
"  Go  home,  ladies,  and  say  your  prayers  there."  * 
The  object  of  the  Low-Church  party  in  Hatcham 
was  to  get  the  Sunday-school  closed. 

Sanders  was  summoned  before  the  Greenwich 
police-court  at  the  instance  of  Mr.  Walker,  who 
subsequently  applied  for  a  summons  against  Fry. 
The  latter  apphcation  was  refused.  And  when 
Mr.  Walker's  solicitor  began  to  open  the  case 
against  Sanders,  the  magistrate,  Mr.  Balguy,  inter- 
rupted him,  insisting  that  the  matter  should  be 
settled  privately  by  arbitration.  The  case  was 
adjourned ;  and  when  it  came  on  again,  Mr.  Bal- 
o-uy  decided  that  Sanders's  acts  did  not  amount  to 
an  offence  under  the  statute.  Divine  Service  not 
having  been  begun  when  they  were  committed. 

Nor  did  the  scandalous  proceedings  cease  for  a 
lono-  time.  Even  in  1882,  complaints  were  made 
that  the  music  of  the  responses  was  disturbed 
from  time  to  time  by  persons  who  persisted  in 
reciting  the  responses  in  conversational  manner, 
and  in  loud  tones  ;  and  that  irreverence,  not  to  say 
profanity,  was  shown  in  a  thousand  other  ways. 
Opposition  visiting,  and  an  opposition  Sunday- 
school,  were  also  commenced,  and  on  the  whole 

*  Letter  to  the  Editor  of  the  Standard,  signed  J.  M.  B.  Also 
Chiorch  Times  for  February  7,  1879. 


the  Low-Church  opponents  of  Catholicism,  not  to 
say  of  Christianity,  might  be  congratulated  by 
their  sympathisers  as  having  done  in  the  parish 
of  St.  James's,  Hatcham,  all  which  they  could  be 
expected  to  have  done. 


Immoral  Period,  continued.  Various  Minor  Prosecutions  and 
Attempts.  The  Priest  in  Absolution.  Society  of  the  Holy 
Cross.  Agitation  against  both.  Its  Hypocritical  Character. 
Anti-confessional  Memorial. 

"  You  shall  see  anon  :  'tis  a  knavish  piece  of  work." — Hamlet, 
Act  iii.  scene  2. 

"  Alterius  infirma  commendatio  est  quae  destructione  fiilcitur." 
— Tertullian,  Adv.  Marc.  iv.  15. 

If  we  were  required  to  specify  any  particular 
year  in  which  the  anti-Catholic  persecution  was  at 
its  worst,  we  should  be  inclined  to  name  the  year 
1877.  In  this  year  the  "Church  Association" 
sent  to  all  its  branches  copies  of  a  paper  to  be 
filled  up  with  information  on  the  following  heads  : 
— "  Churches  in  which  illegal  ceremonies  have  been 
introduced :—(!)  Diocese;  (2)  name  of  parish; 
(3)  name  of  church;  (4)  whether  consecrated  or 
unconsecrated ;  (5)  name  of  incumbent;  (6)  illegal 
acts  and  ceremonies  introduced  into  the  church, 
such  as  vestments,  incense,  lights,  elevation,  pro- 
stration, mixing  water  with  wine,  processions,  &c.  ; 
(7)  When  the  illegal  acts  and  ceremonies  were 

It  is,  indeed,  true  that  the  proceedings  initi- 
ated against  two  Eitualistic  clergymen  had  failed. 


Thus,  a  person  named  Eoughton  had  prosecuted 
the  Eev.  Charles  Parnell,  Incumbent  of  St.  Mar- 
garet's, Princes  Eoad,  Liverpool,  under  the  Church 
Discipline  Act.  St.  Margaret's  had  no  parochial 
district  attached  to  it.  The  congregation  had 
built  their  church,  and  were  maintaining  its  ser- 
vices without  extraneous  help  ;  so  that  the  pro- 
moter (who  had  never  frequented  it,  and  lived  in 
a  distant  part  of  the  town)  had  no  moral  right 
to  interfere.  This,  however,  formed  no  bar  to 
the  "  Church  Association,"  at  whose  instance  the 
prosecution  had  been  got  up.  But  before  the 
case  had  been  carried  very  far,  Mr.  Parnell  re- 
signed the  incumbency  on  independent  grounds, 
and  the  "  Church  Association  "  offered  to  stop  the 
prosecution  if  he  would  pay  their  costs.  This 
Mr.  Parnell  dechned  to  do.  Then  the  Association 
offered  to  withdraw  on  their  part,  each  party  pay- 
ing its  own  costs ;  and  this  proposal  Mr.  Parnell 
accepted.*  His  taxed  costs  were  £151  5s.  8<i.f 
The  Eev.  Charles  Bodington,  also.  Incumbent  of 
St.  Andrew's,  Wolverhampton,  had  been  prose- 
cuted by  a  person  of  the  name  of  Butcher. 
Owing,  however,  to  a  defect  in  the  process.  Lord 
Penzance  found  it  necessary  to  dismiss  the  case,, 
which  he  did  with  a  distinct  expression  of  regret. 
On  the  26th  of  October  a  representation  was  made 
to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  under  the  Public 
Worship  Eegulation  Act :  the  Archbishop  in  this 

*  Letter  from  Mr.  Parnell  in  the  Church  Times  of  Nov.  26, 

t  The  receipt  by  the  "  Church  Association  "  was  acknowledged 
in  the  Report  presented  at  the  annual  meeting  of  Feb.  25,  1876. 


case  takino-  the  place  of  the  Bishop  of  the  diocese, 
because  the  patronage  of  the  living  belonged  to 
the  Bishop.  The  Archbishop,  however,  refused  to 
sanction  the  proceedings,  suggesting  that  the  com- 
plainant should  formally  call  upon  the  Bishop  to 
exercise  his  authority  for  appeasing  all  diversities  ; 
to  which  authority  Mr.  Bodington  was  willing  to 
submit.  The  "  Church  Association,"  however,  had 
taken  an  independent  course — that  of  teaching  the 
street-boys  to  cry  after  the  Catholic  priests  that 
they  would  soon  have  three  months.* 

Against  the  Eev.  Herbert  Gardner,  also,  Vicar 
of  St.  Matthew's,   Smethwick,    in   the  Diocese  of 
Lichfield,    proceedings   were    commenced    in   the 
August  either  of  this  or  of  the  next  year.     The 
prosecutor  was   a  Mr.  H.   T.  Fowler,  one  of  the 
churchwardens.     He  had  already  said  that  there 
should   be   no    peace    as    long    as    Mr.    Gardner 
remained  in  the  parish.     The  charges  were  thir- 
teen in  number:— (1)  Processions,    and  kneeling 
or   bowing    towards     the    Communion-table    and 
towards    the   metal   cross    standing  thereon.     (2) 
Standing  with  back  to  the  people  while  saying  the 
Lord's   Prayer   and   Collect.       (3)  Standing   with 
back  to  the  people   while  saying  the   Prayer  of 
Consecration.     (4)  Elevating  the  paten  or  bread, 
and  also  the  cup,  to  a  much  greater  degree  than 
was  necessary.     (5)  Making  the  sign  of  the  cross 
towards  the  communicants,  and  not  towards  him- 
self.    (6)  Permitting  the  Eev.  E.  A.  tons,  or  other 
curate,  unlawfully  to  prostrate  himself,  kneel,  or 

*  Statement  by  Colonel  Bagnall  at  a  meeting  of  the  English 
Church  Union.     See  Church  Times,  March  2,  1877. 

n.  24 

354  REV.    H.    GARDNER. 

bow  towards  the  cross.  (7)  Administering  to  the 
communicants  by  putting  the  cup  to  their  hps, 
instead  of  placing  it  in  their  hands.  (8)  Singing 
the  Agnus  Dei.  (9)  The  ceremony  of  ablution. 
(10)  Bending  the  knee,  or  bowing  towards  the 
Communion-table,  and  towards  the  metal  cross  on 
the  Communion-table.  (11)  The  curate's  unlawfully 
serving  and  elevating  the  bread  and  wine.  [What 
was  meant  by  "  unlawfully  serving  "  does  not  ap- 
pear.] (12)  Unlawfully  elevating  the  offertory-alms. 
(13)  The  interpolation  of  the  words  "on  the  anni- 
versary of  the  English  Church  Union  "  when  giving 
notice  of  the  celebration  of  the  Holy  Communion. 

The  Bishop  of  Lichfield  (Dr.  Selwyn)  allowed 
proceedings  to  be  taken.  Some  flaws,  however,  in 
the  documents  of  the  prosecution  caused  the  case 
to  fall  through.  The  complainant  made  another 
attempt  against  Mr.  Gardner,  but  the  Bishop  was 
willing  that  the  proceedings  should  be  delayed,  and 
in  the  course  of  the  delay  he  departed  this  life. 
About  the  same  time  the  complainant's  represen- 
tation was  sent  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  ; 
but  he  insisted  on  leaving  it  to  be  dealt  with  by 
Bishop  Selwyn's  successor. 

When  Dr.  Maclagan  came  to  the  see,  he  requested 
Mr.  Gardner  to  cease  making  the  sign  of  the  cross 
when  administering  the  consecrated  elements,  but 
would  not  support  the  complainant  any  further  ; 
and  the  latter  found  it  useless  to  attempt  raising 
any  more  opposition.* 

In  another  case,  however,  on  application  being 
made  to  Bishop  Selwyn  by  three  parishioners  against 

*  This  I  have  by  private  information  kindly  furnished. 


the  Eev.  Edward  Glover,  Vicar  of  Christ  Church, 
Wolverhampton,  on  account  of  the  eastward  posi- 
tion, the  mixed  chalice,  altar-lights,  and  coloured 
stoles,  the  Bishop  refused  to  allow  a  prosecution. 

An  attempt  was  made  by  the  Eev.  John  Sidney 
Adolphus  Vatcher,  Senior  Curate  and  Evening  Lec- 
turer of  St.  George's-in-the-East,  to  get  up  a  pro- 
secution, in  connexion  with  the  "  Church  Associ- 
ation," against  the  Eev.  Charles  Lowder,  Vicar  of 
St.  Peter's,  London  Docks.  This,  however,  was 
not  only  without  the  consent  of  his  Eector,  but  in 
direct  opposition  to  the  Eector's  views,  which  were 
in  favour  of  letting  his  brother-clergy  alone  ;  and 
it  also  came  to  nought. 

An  attempt  was  made  also  to  get  up  a  prose- 
cution against  the  Eev.  Thomas  Thellusson  Carter, 
Eector  of  Clewer,  in  the  Diocese  of  Oxford,  and 
Honorary  Canon  of  Christ  Church.  Three  persons 
(one  of  them  named  Bulkeley)  were  found  willing 
to  profess  themselves  aggrieved  parishioners  ;  and 
they  were  duly  provided  with  a  formal  guarantee 
that  the  "  Church  Association  "  would  provide  their 
costs  in  the  suit.  This  last  paper  they  in  their 
simplicity  sent  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  (Dr.  Mac- 
karness)  along  with  their  complaint  against  Mr. 
Carter,  but  were  straightway  informed  by  the 
Bishop  that  the  "  Church  Association  "  had,  by  fur- 
nishing such  a  guarantee,  become  guilty  of  the  of- 
fence termed  by  lawyers  "  maintenance,"  and  which 
is  defined  to  be  an  officious  intermeddling  in  a  suit 
by  assisting  either  party  with  money  or  otherwise  ; 
and  their  attempt  therefore  fell  to  the  ground.  We 
shall  see  hereafter  how  a  similar  attempt  was  made 

24 2 

356  REV.    JOHN    CHAMBERS. 

subsequently,  and  met  with  more  success,  though 
not  exactly  in  the  manner  which  had  been  contem- 

In  this  same  year  (1877)  occasion  was  found 
for  another  set  attack  upon  Catholic  belief  and 
practice,  independent  of  the  attacks  on  Catholic 
ritual.  It  had  always  been  held  in  the  Church  of 
England  that  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  left  authority 
in  His  Church  to  absolve  all  sinners  who  truly  re- 
pent and  believe  in  Him  ;  and  that  in  consequence 
of  this  every  priest  may,  on  receiving  a  confession 
of  sin,  minister  the  forgiveness  of  the  same  from  the 
Lord  :  so  that  when,  in  the  fulfilment  of  his  office, 
he  says  to  anyone,  "  I  absolve  thee,"  the  person  so 
addressed,  being  a  penitent  believer,  is  forgiven 
then  and  there  by  the  Lord  ;  Wlio,  being  Himself 
in  heaven,  performs  the  act  of  forgiveness  by  His 
priest  upon  earth,  the  priest  having,  when  he  was 
ordained,  received  the  Spirit  of  Christ  for  this  pur- 
pose. This  truth,  like  others,  had  been  yerj  much 
neglected  before  the  time  of  the  Catholic  revival. 
Attention,  however,  had  been  called  to  it  in  the 
Tracts  for  the  Times,  and  various  members  of  the 
Church  of  England,  who  believed  what  they  read  in 
their  Prayer-books,  set  themselves  to  act  upon  it  in 
their  practice  :  penitents  setting  themselves  to  make 
confession  of  their  sins,  and  priests  setting  them- 
selves to  minister  absolution  according  to  what  they 
belie vedj  to  be  the  mind  of  the  Anglican  Church. 

One  of  these  priests  was  the  Eev.  John  Chambers, 
Incumbent  of  St.  Mary's,  Crown  Street,  Soho.  He 
composed  a  work  to  which  we  have  already  alluded, 
and  which  he  entitled  The  Priest  in  Absolution  :  and 

"  THE    PRIEST    IN    ABSOLUTION."  357 

for  the  composition  of  which  he  was  quahfied  not 
only  by  deep  personal  piety,  but  also  by  great  know- 
ledge of  human  nature,  and  large  experience  in  re- 
ceiving confessions.  He  would  not,  however,  publish 
his  work;  preferring  that  it  should  have  circula- 
tion only  among  those  who  would  put  it  to  a  proper 
use.  In  1875  he  departed  to  his  rest,  his  death 
having  been  hastened,  if  not  caused,  by  his  hard 
ministerial  work  ;  and  the  book  which  he  had  com- 
posed was  then  offered  by  his  executors  to  a  Society 
called  the  Society  of  the  Holy  Cross ;  the  members 
of  that  Society  being  the  parties  most  likely  to  carry 
out  Mr.  Chambers's  wishes  with  regard  to  the  circu- 
lation of  the  work. 

The  work  contained,  among  other  advice,  re- 
commendations as  to  the  questioning  of  penitents 
by  the  priest.  No  doubt,  if  the  penitent  has  been 
properly  instructed,  and  is  coming  to  the  ordin- 
ance of  absolution  in  a  right  spirit,  no  such  ques- 
tioning is  necessary  ;  he  will  confess  all  which 
he  needs  to  confess,  that  is,  all  which  he  ought 
to  confess,  and  will  do  so  in  the  matter  both 
of  generals  and  of  details.  If,  however,  a  Church 
were  introducing  for  the  first  time  among  its 
members  the  use  of  private  confession,  the  question 
would  arise.  On  whom  should  rest  the  responsi- 
bility of  getting  the  confession  made  with  suffi- 
cient fulness  ?  on  the  penitent  or  on  the  priest  ? 
The  Western  Church  had  ruled  that  the  priest 
should  bear  some  part  of  the  responsibility ;  and 
that  he  was  to  discharge  his  duty  by  question- 
ing the  penitent  as  far  as  he  might  deem  necessary. 
And  on  that  principle  Mr.  Chambers  had  proceeded 


ill  the  counsels  which  he  gave  to  priests  using  his 
book.  He  specified  certain  questions  which,  or  the 
hke  of  which,  it  might  be  necessary  to  put  to  a 
penitent  in  certain  particular  cases  ;  but  appended 
to  one  of  his  chapters  the  following  note  : — "  It  is 
scarcely  needful  to  observe  that  the  main  ol^ject  in 
entering  upon  this  subject  of  spiritual  pathology,  is 
to  aid  the  priest  to  avoid  needless  and  dangerous 
inquiries,  and  at  the  same  time  not  to  omit  probing 
the  wounds  of  sin  when  necessary  for  the  patient's 
entire  cure,  often  not  only  of  soul,  but  also  of 
body."  *  Another  chapter,  "  Concerning  the  Mode 
of  Questioning  Penitents,"  commenced  thus  : — "  We 
have  said  already  that  the  priest  cannot  be  too 
careful,  in  questions  about  sin,  to  avoid  giving  the 
penitent  thereby  any  further  acquaintance  with 
evil.  Yet,  at  the  same  time,  we  must  often  supply 
the  want  of  knowledge  on  the  part  of  the  penitent, 
lest  through  ignorance  a  part  of  the  confession  be 
kept  back  which  is  the  most  necessary  to  be  un- 
folded. Not  to  be  impatient,  and  not  to  travel  too 
fast,  is  the  great  secret  of  avoiding  great  indiscre- 
tions." Meanwhile  "  the  priest  must  he  careful  also 
7iot  to  he  too  reserved  in  questions  lest  he  risk  thereby 
the  loss  of  a  great  good  for  the  sake  of  a  less.  It  is 
easy  for  an  adroit  priest  to  ask  questions,  especially 
upon  the  subject  of  purity,  so  as  not  to  be  under- 

*  Page  21  (footnote  to  the  chapter  on  Impiu-ity,  as  one  of 
the  Seven  Capital  Sins).  This  and  the  following  citations  are 
taken  at  second-hand  from  "  The  Priest  in  Absolution  "  and  the 
Society  of  the  Holy  Cross.  A  Correspondence  between  "  A  London 
Priest"  and  A.  H.  MacTconochie,  M.A.,  Perpetual  Curate  of  St. 
Albam,  the  Martyr,  Holborn.  Beprinted,  with  considerable  ad- 
ditions, from  the  "  Daily  Express.'" 

"  THE    PRIEST    IN    ABSOLUTION."  359 

stood  by  anyone  except  such  as  is  guilty  of  what 
is  supposed.  If  a  child  confess  '  bad  thoughts,' 
it  may  be  asked,  '  Wliat  sort  of  thoughts  ? '  for 
in  children  they  are  often  confined  to  anger  and 
revenge.  Children  should  always  be  exhorted  to 
remember  that  they  are  always  in  the  presence 
of  God,  and  that  they  should  never  do  what  they 
would  be  ashamed  of  their  parents  seeing."  *  And 
in  advising  the  priest  as  to  his  manner  of  dealing 
with  children,  and  specifying  certain  questions 
which  might  be  necessary  in  particular  cases,  Mr. 
Chambers  proceeded — "  But  such  questions  as  these 
should  be  put  in  the  most  guarded  manner,  and 
'only  when  there  is  good  reason  to  fear  that  the 
child  has  been  exposed  to  temptations  of  this  sort. 
It  is  better  that  a  confession  should  be  materially 
wanting  in  fulness,  than  that  a  child  should  learn 
or  imbibe  a  desire  to  know  what  hitherto  had  been 
hid  from  its  understanding."  f 

The  book  consisted  of  two  parts.  Part  I.,  con- 
taining 91  pages,  with  three  pages  and  a  half  of 
"  Advertisement  to  the  Eeader,"  treated  of  the 
priest's  inner  life,  in  reference  to  the  work  of 
hearing  confessions  and  ministering  to  the  peni- 
tent's reformation  in  holiness.  Part  II.,  containing 
322  pages,  with  three  more  pages  of  "  Advertise- 
ment," consisted  almost  wholly  of  instructions  as 
to  the  nature  of  various  acts  in  reference  to  sin : 
"just  as  a  medical  book  would  deal  with  certain 
states  of  body  in  relation  to  disease."     And  it  was 

*  Pages  80,  81,  cited  in  the  Correspondence  just  named,  pp.  29, 
30.    Why  we  print  certain  words  in  itahcs  will  be  seen  further  on. 
t  Page  144,  cite'd  in  the  same  Correspondence,  p.  31. 


described  by  a  layman,  strong  both  in  body  and  in 
mind,  as  "  a  perfectly  chaste  book."* 

.  So  much  for  the  character  of  the  book  entitled 
The  Priest  in  Absolution.     Now  about  the  Society 
OF  THE  Holy  Cross,  to  which  the  copyright  had 
been  given.     It   was    formed   in  or  about  1855, 
primarily  for  the  purpose  of  deepening  the  spiri- 
tual life  in  the  members  by  means  of  a  definite 
rule.     The  members  of  the  Society  were  bishops, 
priests,  deacons,  and  bond  fide  candidates  for  Holy 
Orders  ;  and  were  divided  into  Probationers  (whose 
period  of  probation  was  one  year)  and  Brethren  ; 
the  latter  (who  were  all  in  the  priesthood)  being  the 
governing  body.     All  the  members  were  committed 
to  one  rule  at  least,  called  the  Green  Eule.     There 
were  two  other  rules,  to  be  embraced  at  option  : 
one  of  these  was  restricted  to  celibates.    The  Green 
Eule  included   various  minor  rules,   such  as  the 
rising  from  bed  not  later  than  half-past  seven  in 
the  morning  :  the  celebrating,  if  possible,  on  all 
Sundays  and  festivals :  the  communicating  in   all 
cases  fasting  :  the  making  sacramental  confession 
at  least  once  a  year,  and  as  often  as  conscience 
might  require  :  the  reading  devotionally  a  portion 
of  Scripture  every  day  :  and  the  making  a  retreat 
every  year.     And  a  standard  of  daily  life,  specify- 
ing particulars  as  to  food,  dress,  recreation,  study, 
and  society,  was  recommended  to  those  Brethren 
who  followed  this  rule. 

Besides  the  inner  work  done  by  the  members  of 
the  Society  of  the  Holy  Cross  in  the  observance 
of  the  Society's  rules,  the  Society  proposed  to  do 

*  See  the  above-cited  Correspondence,  p.  5. 


work  of  an  external  character,  including  mission- 
work  at  home  and  abroad — the  issuing  of  tracts 
and  other  publications — and  common  action  in 
matters  affecting  the  interests  of  the  Church.  And 
the  Brethren  were  pledged  to  aid  each  other  both 
in  spiritual  and  in  temporal  matters. 

Such  was  the  Society  into  whose  possession  the 
copyright  of  The  Priest  in  Absolution  had  come. 
Being  a  society  for  the  increase  of  personal  piety, 
it  naturally  abstained  from  publicity.  But  on  the 
occasion  of  the  Church  Congress  at  Wolverhampton 
in  1867  it  came  before  the  public,  distributing 
publicly  a  printed  statement  of  its  nature  and  ob- 
jects, and  making  itself  known  in  other  ways  as 

It  appears  that  by  some  means  or  other  one  or 
more  copies  of  The  Priest  in  Absolution  had  come 
into  the  hands  of  certain  members  of  the  "  Church 
Association."  Several  of  the  bishops  had  become 
acquainted  with  the  existence  of  the  book,  and  one 
at  least  had  certainly  been  giving  close  attention 
to  it  for  several  weeks  :  *  when,  on  the  night  of 
the  14th  of  June,  1877,  Lord  Eedesdale  drew  at- 
tention in  the  House  of  Lords  both  to  the  book 
and  to  the  Society  of  the  Holy  Cross,  naming  in 
his  speech  fifteen  priests  members  of  the  Society. 
The  noble  Lord  did,  at  the  same  time,  his  best  to 
hold  up  both  the  book  and  the  Society  to  public 
execration  :  representing  the  book  as  published, 
when  the  very  title-page  declared  that  it  was  not ; 
reading  garbled  extracts  from  the  book,  the  con- 

*  See  the  above-cited  Correspondence,  p.  5. 


text  of  which  extracts  was  alone  sufficient  to  refute 
entirely  the  character  which,  on  the  strength  of 
the  garbling,  his  Lordship  sought  to  fasten  on  the 
•Society  and  its  members  ;  *  and  keeping  out  of 
sight  the  fact  that  the  strongest  passages  against 
which  objection  might  be  thought  to  lie  were  ex- 
tracts from  so  generally  a|)proved  a  divine  as 
Bishop  Jeremy  Taylor.  He  also  spoke  of  The 
Priest's  Prayer-book  (fifth  edition),. 'in  which  were 
directions  for  communicating  a  sick  person  of  the 
reserved  Sacrament,  and  thought  that  there  should 
be  a  decided  condemnation  of  the  practices  indi- 
cated or  recommended  in  the  two  works. 

The  reader  will  ask,  perhaps,  how  Lord  Eedes- 
dale  obtained  access  to  The  Priest  in  Absolution, 
that  work  being  printed  but  not  published.  Two 
answers  were  given  at  the  time.  According  to 
Mr.  CoUette,  Secretary  of  the  Society  for  the  Sup- 
pression of  Vice,  a  person  went  into  the  study  of  a 
clergyman,  saw  the  book  on  the  table,  and  took  it 
away.  And  it  is  remarkable  that  Mr.  CoUette,  in 
giving  this  account,  did  not  give  the  slightest  in- 
timation that  he  regarded  the  act  of  theft  as  being 
at  all  morally  wrong ;  nor,  indeed,  did  such  an 
idea  seem  to  be  entertained  by  more  than  a  few 
Low-Churchmen,  if,  indeed,  it  was  entertained  by 
any.  As  a  Low-Church  clergyman  once  admitted 
to  the  writer  that  there  were  limitations  to  the  law 
of  charity — in  other  words,  that  Christians  are  not 
always  bound  to  love  their  neighbour  as  them- 
selves— so    Mr.   CoUette    and   his   friends  seem  to 

*  One  of  the  passages  quoted  by  Lord  Redesdale  apart  from  the 
context  is  given  above,  in  itahcs. 


have  taken  for  granted  that  there  were  limitations 
to  the  law  of  common  honesty.  On  the  other 
hand,  a  Major  Wether al  denied  Mr.  CoUette's  state- 
ment, and  said  that  he  was  the  one  who  gave  the 
book  to  Lord  Eedesdale.  His  account  was,  "  It 
was  lent  to  me  about  two  months  ago  by  Mr. 
Fleming  of  Half-Moon  Street,  whose  name  is 
boldly  printed  on  the  cover,  and  in  whose  posses- 
sion it  has  been,  I  am  informed,  for  three  years, 
and  most  certainly  was  not  procured  by  him  in  the 
surreptitious  and  dishonest  manner  implied  in  Mr, 
GoUette's  letter."  * 

Be  this,  however,  as  it  may,  when  the  noble  Lord 
had  spoken,  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  thanked 
him  for  bringing  the  subject  forward.  As  to  The 
Priest  in  Absolution,  it  was,  he  said,  a  disgrace  to 
the  community  that  such  a  book  should  be  circu- 
lated under  the  authority  of  clergymen  of  the 
Established  Church.  The  Bishop  of  Gloucester 
and  Bristol  (Dr.  Ellicott)  said  that  when  a  clergy- 
man connected  with  the  Society  of  the  Holy  Cross 
was  about  to  enter  his  diocese  through  the  resig- 
nation of  another  clergyman,  and  it  was  in  his 
power  to  refuse  accepting  the  resignation  of  the 
latter,  he  did  refuse,  and  required  the  former  clergy- 
man to  sign  a  paper  notifying  his  withdrawal  from 
the  Society,  and  his  repudiation  of  the  Tlie  Priest 
in  Absolution  ;  which  paper,  said  the  Bishop,  was 

Li  the  House  of  Commons,  on  the  21st  of  June, 
Mr.  J.  Cowen  asked  the  Home  Secretary  (the 
Eight  Hon.  E.  A.  Cross)  if  his  attention  had  been 

*  Church  Times  for  August  10,  1877. 


directed  to  a  book  recently  published,  entitled 
The  Priest  in  Absolution  ;  if  he  was  aware  that  the 
book  was  substantially  the  same  as  one  for  the 
circulation  of  which  a  lecturer  against  auricular 
confession  had  been  not  long  before  imprisoned  ; 
if  he  was  aware  that  The  Priest  m  Absolution  was 
printed  with  the  sanction  and  for  the  use  of  the 
"  Master,  Vicars,  and  Brethren  of  the  Society  of 
the  Holy  Cross,"  of  which  there  were  seven  hun- 
dred members,  chiefly  clergymen  of  the  Church 
of  England  ;  and  if  he  was  prepared  to  take  steps 
for  testing  the  legality  of  the  publication.  Mr. 
Forsyth  asked  the  Attorney-General  (Sir  J.  Holker) 
whether  his  attention  had  been  directed  to  the 
distribution  of  a  book  called  The  Priest  in  Abso- 
lution by  certain  clergymen  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  whether  he  had  considered  the  pro- 
priety of  instituting  a  prosecution  following  the 
example  of  the  prosecution  then  pending  against 
the  publishers  of  a  book  called  The  Fruits  of 
Philosophy.  The  Attorney-General  answered  both 
questions  together.  His  attention  had  been  drawn 
to  the  book,  but  he  had  no  special  means  of  ob- 
taining information  on  the  subject ;  nor  was  he 
aware  whether  the  facts  [he  probably  meant  the 
allegations]  could  be  substantiated  or  not.  The 
Government  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  prosecu- 
tion of  Tlie  Fruits  of  Philosophy.  Nor  was  there 
any  reason  why  proceedings  should  be  taken  in 
this  case  of  The  Priest  in  Absolution,  that  book  not 
being  circulated  among  the  laity.  If,  however, 
it  were  so  circulated,  the  circulators  ought  to  be 
prosecuted  for  publishing  an  "  obscene  and  dis- 
gusting book." 


This  was  the  beginning  of  the  agitation  against 
The  Priest  in  Absolution  and  the  Society  of  the 
Holy  Cross.  And  for  weeks — we  might  almost  say 
for  months — the  air  was  full  of  invectives  ao-ainst 
both  book  and  Society.  And  thus  was  the  attempt 
made  to  raise  a  new  storm  of  persecution  against 
some  of  the  most  exemplary  clergy  of  the  Church 
of  England.  The  attempt  had  a  certain  amount 
of  success.  Church- Associationists  and  those  who 
sympathised  with  them  made  the  platform  ring 
with  denunciations  of  clergy  who  belonged  to  the 
Society  of  the  Holy  Cross.  One  country  newspaper 
published  a  list  of  clergy  in  one  neighbourhood 
who  were  supposed  to  belong  to  it.  The  visitino- 
Justices  who  ruled  over  the  Clerkenwell  House  of 
Detention,  and  had  lately  renewed  a  licence  for  the 
notorious  Argyll  Eooms,  had  the  impertinence  to 
pass  a  resolution  reflecting  by  implication  on  their 
excellent  chaplain,  the  Eev.  John  William  Horsley, 
for  the  sole  offence  of  belonging  to  the  obnoxious 
Society  ;  *  insomuch  that  that  gentleman,  deemino- 
discretion  to  be  the  better  part  of  valour,  resigned 
his  membership.  The  trustees  of  Betton's  Charity 
resolved  to  withdraw  their  grants  from  all  schools 
under  the  superintendence  or  management  of  cler- 
gymen who  were  members  either  of  the  Society  of 
the  Holy  Cross,  or  of  the  Confraternity  of  the 
Blessed  Sacrament ;  and  had  the  impertinence  to 
question   clergymen   on   these   private    matters. f 

*  The  resolution  (which  was  passed  akaost  unanimously)  was 
"  That  the  ministrations  of  a  clergyman  who  should  be  a  member 
of  the  Holy  Cross  Society  would  be  calculated  to  fiu-ther  deprave 
the  inmates  of  the  Clerkenwell  Jail." 

t  See  the  Church  Times  for  December  14,  1887,  p.  706 ;  also 
for  December  21,  p.  720. 


One  clergyman,  eager  to  save  his  own  popularity, 
thought  it  necessary,  in  contradicting  the  statement 
that  he  was  himself  a  member,  to  say  that  he 
looked  upon  it  as  the  foulest  libel  which  could  be 
published  about  an  English  clergyman.  Those 
members  of  the  Society  who  were  candidates  for 
Holy  Orders  soon  perceived  that  their  chances  of 
ordination  would  be  diminished,  if  not  destroyed, 
and  those  who  were  curates  came  to  a  like  con- 
clusion with  regard  to  their  chances  of  promotion, 
to  say  nothing  of  the  possibility  of  their  being 
dismissed  at  the  earliest  notice.  In  short,  the 
Society  soon  found  it  desirable  to  refuse  member- 
ship for  the  future  to  all  persons  who  were  not 
already  both  in  Holy  Orders  and  beneficed. 

The  hypocrisy  connected  with  this  agitation  will 
be  sufficiently  perceived  when  it  is  noted  that  the 
members  of  the  "  Church  Association  "  had  some- 
times allowed  The  Co7ifessio7ial  Unmasked  to  be 
publicly  exposed  for  sale  at  lectures  given  under 
their  auspices.  This  at  least  had  been  done  at  a 
lecture  given  at  the  Horns  Assembly  Eooms,  Ken- 
ninp-ton,  by  a  clergyman  of  the  name  of  Coote, 
November  28,  1867,  At  the  door  of  the  room 
was  a  man  behind  a  table,  with  copies  of  the  above- 
named  work,  and  other  books  of  a  like  character, 
and  soliciting  everyone  on  passing  out  of  the  room 
to  buy.  The  only  bishop,  however,  who  appears 
to  have  characterised  the  agitation  as  hypocritical 
was  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  (Dr.  Mackarness). 

The  agitation  continued,  and  culminated  in  a 
petition  to  the  Queen,  which  was  got  up  by  the 
"  Church  Association,"  and  of  which  we  must  now 


speak.     We  have  already  seen  how  tlie  dishonesty 
of  the  Low-Church  party  with  respect  to  the  Prayer- 
book  had  been  evidenced  from  the  first  beginnino-s 
of  the  party.    We  have  seen,  too,  how  their  tactics 
had  been  twofold ;    one  section  of  the  party  pro- 
fessing to  be  satisfied  with  the  Prayer-book  as  it 
was,  pretending  great  regard  for  its  rules  and  in- 
junctions,  and   prosecuting  Eitualistic  clergymen 
on  charges  of  violating  them ;    while  another  sec- 
tion proclaimed  aloud  that  the  Prayer-book  needed 
revising    in    a   Protestant    direction,    and   strove 
from  time  to  time  to  get  such  revision  effected  by 
Parliament.     This  year  (1877)  the  former  section 
adopted   the    tactics    of   the  latter    section.     The 
Prayer-book  contemplates   in   the    clearest   terms 
the  existence    of  the    confessional  as    one  of  the 
Church's   recognised    institutions — an    institution 
whereof  two  classes  of  persons  in  particular  were 
to  be  specially  moved  to  have  recourse  to  it :    sick 
persons  with  burdened  consciences,  and  all  persons 
preparing  for  Holy  Communion,  whose  private  self- 
examination  and  secret  penitence  did  not  suffice 
to  make  them  feel  at  ease  with  themselves.     Pre- 
suming, however,  on  the  carelessness  with  which 
the  general  run  of  Low-Church  people  read  their 
Prayer-books,  the  "  Church  Association  "  now  o-ot 
up  a  memorial  to  the  Queen  "  praying  her  Majesty 
to  use  all  the  inffuence  at  her  command  to  repress 
the  practice  of  auricular  confession." 

This  petition  purported  to  proceed  from  members 
of  the  Church  of  England.  It  will  be  remembered, 
too,  that  the  Association  which  got  it  up  professed 
to  exist  for  the  purpose  of  upholding  the  doctrine 


and  principles  of  the  same  Church.  Here,  then, 
were  members  of  the  Church  of  England  pledgino' 
themselves  to  uphold  the  Church's  doctrine  and 
principles,  and  jet  seeking  that  one  distinctly  de- 
clared doctrine  of  the  same  Church  should  be 
practically  contradicted,  and  those  who  acted  upon 
that  doctrine  in  their  practice  discouraged  in  every 
possible  way.  The  petition  was  signed  by  more 
than  one  person  who  had  special  private  reasons 
for  disapproving  of  the  practice  of  confession. 
For  the  Duke  of  Sutherland,  one  of  those  who 
signed  it,  had  presided  at  a  dinner  given  in  honour 
of  a  "  gentleman  "  who  had  been  dismissed  from 
the  Queen's  Army  for  attempting  to  seduce  a  young 
lady  in  a  railway-carriage,  and  another  person 
whose  name  appeared  among  the  signatures  had 
been  condemned  to  pay  costs  as  co-respondent  in  a 
divorce-suit.  The  manner,  too,  in  which  signatures 
were  obtained  did  not  speak  for  the  views  of  the 
promoters  as  to  truthfulness.  Many  persons  were 
allowed  to  sign  who  were  bond  jide  Dissenters.* 
Some  were  induced  to  sign  who  had  no  interest  in 
the  subject-matter.f  One,  an  admirer  of  Charles 
Bradlaugh,  the  atheist,  said,  "  I  signed  but  I  did 
not  read  it,  and  do  not  know  what  it  is  for.  I 
would  sign  anything  to  do  away  with  religion,  or 
what  they  call  religion."J  Another  said  that  he 
hated  the  Church  of  England,  and  would  like  to 
pull  it  down.§     One  person  acknowledged  having 

*  Church  Times  for  1877,  September  28,  p,  537  ;  November  16, 
p.  640 ;  November  23,  p.  656  ;  November  30,  p.  672. 
t  Ih.  September  28,  p.  537. 
X  Ih.  December  7,  p.  689.  §  Ih. 


been  asked  six  or  eight  times  to  sign,  and  having 
sio^ned  each  time.*  Some  children  were  told  that 
they  could  sign  for  their  fathers  or  mothers,  and 
did  so.f  The  signatures  of  Sunday  School  chil- 
dren were  accepted.  J  In  more  than  one  case,  copies 
of  the  memorial  were  taken  to  public-houses  and 
meeting-houses.*^  One  signature  was  that  of  a 
prostitute.  II  The  total  number  of  signatures  was 
400,702.  But,  nevertheless.  Lord  Oranmore  after- 
wards complained  bitterly,  at  a  meeting  of  the 
Protestant  Eeformation  Society,  that  only  a  hun- 
dred peers  and  as  many  members  of  the  House 
of  Commons  had  signed.  And  it  was,  perhaps,  as 
much  from  the  knowleds^e  comincf  abroad  of  how 
some  signatures  had  been  obtained  as  from  any- 
thing else  that  (as  Mr.  Andrews,  Chairman  of  the 
"  Church  Association  "  acknowledged  at  the  autumn 
Conference  in  1880)  no  result  at  all  had  followed 
on  the  presentation  of  the  memorial. 

*  Clmrch  Times  for  1877,  November  9,  p.  628. 

t  Ih.  December  14,  p.  706. 

X  lb.  November  23,  p.  656. 

§  Ih.  also  December  28,  p.  732.  ||  lb. 

n.  25 



Immoral  Period,  continued.  Low- Church  Conduct  at  the  Croydon 
Church  Congress.  Low-Church  Secessions.  Conference  of 
High- Churchmen  and  Low-Churchmen  at  Lamheth.  Low- 
Church  Withdrawals  from  the  S.  P.  C.  K.  Proceedings  against 
Mr.  Edwards.  Profane  Mob  in  his  Church.  Bishop  Jackson 
and  the  Holy  Cross  Society.  Further  Proceedings  against  Mr. 
Mackonochie.  Lord  Penzance  and  Sir  Alexander  Cockbvirn. 
Memorial  against  Cuddesdon  College.  Third  Suit  against  Mr. 
Mackonochie.     Wycliffe  and  Ridley  Halls. 

"  King.     My  Lord  Chief  Justice,  speak  to  that  vain  man. 
Ch.  J.   Have  you  yom-  wits  ?  know  you  what  'tis  you  speak  ?  " 
King  Henry  IV.,  Second  Part,  Act  v.,  Scene  4. 

The  Churcli  Congress  was  held  in  the  year  1877 
at  Croydon,  in  Surrey,  and  was  attended  by  many 
Low-Churchmen,  ahhough  urged  very  strongly  by 
some  of  their  Low-Church  brethren  to  stay  away. 
The  Earl  of  Harrowby  and  some  other  Low- 
Churchmen  then  endeavoured,  at  the  hazard  of  a 
riot,  to  fix  a  factitious  unpopularity  upon  the 
Eitualists ;  and  an  attempt  was  also  made  to  oust 
members  of  the  Society  of  the  Holy  Cross  in  par- 
ticular from  taking  any  prominent  part  in  the 
proceedings.     Both  attempts,  however,  failed. 

We  have  already  remarked*  upon  the  seces- 
sion of  Dr.  Gregg.  The  Eev.  Capel  Molyneux, 
Incumbent  of  St.  Paul's,  Onslow  Square,  resigned 
his  benefice  in  the  first  half  of  this  year,  on  the 
ground  that  he  could  not  conscientiously  make 
those  subscriptions  which,  in  accordance  with  the 
law,  he  had  made  previously  to  entering  upon  his 

*  See  above,  p.  328. 


l3enefice ;  and  his  example  was  followed  in  the 
April  of  the  following  year  (1878)  by  another 
Low-Church  clergyman,  the  Eev.  Charles  Tamber- 
lane  Astley,  Vicar  of  Gillingham,  near  Chatham. 
His  stumbling-blocks  were  the  doctrines  of  Bap- 
tismal Eegeneration  and  Priestly  Absolution  as 
taught  in  the  Prayer-book.  Would  that  the  Eev. 
Eowley  Hill,  Vicar  of  Sheffield,  and  a  member  of 
the  "  Church  Association,"  had  been  content  to 
follow  the  examples  of  those  gentlemen  !  or  rather, 
to  have  abstained  altogether  from  taking  orders 
in  the  Church  of  Ens^land !  Instead  of  doincf  so, 
however,  he  allowed  himself  to  be  consecrated,  on 
the  nomination  of  the  Earl  of  Beaconsfield,  to  the 
See  of  Sodor  and  Man. 

In  the  December  of  this  year  (1877)  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  invited  representative  men 
of  both  High-Church  and  Low-Church  parties  to 
meet  at  Lambeth  and  discuss  the  possibility  of 
union  amongst  Churchpeople.  On  which  the  Rock 
remarked :  "  We  are  told  that  Friday's  gather- 
incf  was  the  second  of  its  kind — the  first  having 
been  held  at  Lambeth  in  August  last.  But  if  so, 
how  came  the  Evangelical  clergy  there  ?  In  society, 
people  who  have  any  regard  for  their  repu- 
tation would  scarcely  accept  a  second  invitation  to 
a  house  where  on  a  previous  occasion  they  had 
met  Dr.  Gully  and  Mrs.  Bravo.  Are  God's  people 
to  be  less  careful  of  their  character  than  men  of 
the  world  ?  If  not,  how  came  it  to  pass  that  after 
being  once  asked  to  meet  law-breakers,  traitors, 
blasphemers,  and  idolaters,  our  Eyles,  Cadmans, 
Garbetts,  Auriols,  &c.,  should  be  ready  to  do  so  a 



second  time  ?  .  .  .  .  Do  our  friends  believe  that 
their  attendance  at  the  Holy  Communion  in  such 
strange  companionship  would  be  an  act  well- 
pleasing  to  Almighty  God?  Are  ministers  who 
would  rather  die  than  surrender  the  Protestant 
view  of  the  Lord's  Supper  to  kneel  side  by  side 
with  cannibal  '  priests  '  who  first  worship  and  then 
devour  the  God  whom  they  pretend  they  have 
made  ?  " 

To  do  deserved  credit,  however,  to  the  ultra- 
members  of  the  Low-Church  part}^  Eitualists  were 
not  the  only  hetes  noires  of  their  estimation.  In  this 
same  December  the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury  withdrew 
his  name  from  the  lists  of  the  Society  for  Promoting 
Christian  Knowledge,  on  the  ground  that  a  little 
work  by  Mr.  Brownlow  Maitland,  and  published 
by  the  Society,  on  The  Argument  from  Prophecy, 
was  neologian.  Mr.  Brownlow  Maitland  had,  it 
seems,  given  up  certain  special  passages  from  the 
class  of  admitted  prophecies,  for  argument's  sake, 
and  with  a  view  to  occupying  a  common  ground 
with  his  adversaries.  Dean  Close  and  Canon 
Miller  (the  Vicar  of  Greenwich)  followed  the  noble 
Lord's  example,  and  Dean  Law,  Canon  Garbett,  the 
Record,  and  other  parties  joined  in  the  outcry 
against  the  Society. 

We  must  now,  however,  cast  our  eyes  back  a 
month  or  two,  in  order  to  see  what  had  been  done 
in  the  case  of  Mr.  Edwards,  the  Vicar  of  Prestbury. 
He  was  cited  in  due  course  to  appear  before  Lord 
Penzance;  who,  on  the  17tli  of  July,  1877,  gave 
judgment,  sitting  in  the  library  of  Lambeth  Palace. 
The  points  complained  of  had  been,  in  one  way  or 


another,  reduced  to  two,  viz.  the  having  a  cruci- 
fix over  the  altar,  and  the  wearing  Eucharistic 
vestments.  The  suit  with  regard  to  the  crucifix 
was  dismissed,  on  the  ground  that  the  promoters 
might,  if  they  thought  fit,  apply  for  a  faculty  to  have 
the  crucifix  removed.  As  to  the  vestments,  Mr. 
Edwards's  defence  was  that  the  Eidsdale  Judgment 
had  turned  upon  an  error  in  fact,  the  Judicial 
Committee  having  assumed  the  obligatory  force  of 
the  Advertisements  of  Archbishop  Parker,  whereas 
no  proof  had  been  given  either  that  Queen  Eliza- 
beth authorised  them,  or  (if  she  had  done  so,  which 
subsequent  research  showed  that  she  had  not) 
that  the  document  cited  as  the  Advertisements  was 
the  same  as  was  alleged  to  have  been  authorised. 
To  this,  however.  Lord  Penzance  refused  to  listen, 
saying  that  if  he  allowed  the  controversy  to  be 
opened  again,  the  law  would  be  liable  to  vary  if 
"  any  new  or  additional  historical  facts  should  be 
disinterred  from  the  lumber  of  the  past,"  and  he 
pronounced  Mr.  Edwards  guilty  of  illegal  conduct 
in  wearing  the  Eucharistic  vestments,  and  ordered 
him  to  cease  from  wearing  them.  Each  side  had 
to  pay  its  own  costs.  Erom  this  judgment  Mr. 
Edwards  appealed  to  the  Queen  in  Council. 

On  the  3rd  of  November,  1877,  he  was  ordered 
by  Lord  Penzance  to  file  a  declaration  within  a 
month  promising  that  he  would  comply  with  Lord 
Penzance's  order  ;  which  Mr.  Edwards  did  not  do. 
On  the  5th  of  January,  1878,  Mr.  Moore,  the 
proctor  for  Mr.  Combe — that  is,  for  the  "  Church 
Association  " — submitted  that  as  Mr.  Edwards  had 
not  complied  with  Lord  Penzance's  first  order,  but 


had  appealed  to  the  Queen  in  Council,  he  should  now 
be  served  with  a  notice,  so  that  ground  might  be 
afforded  for  applying  to  have  a  definitive  sentence 
pronounced.  Lord  Penzance  heard  arguments  in 
favour  of  Mr.  Moore's  point  on  the  10th,  but  deferred 
his  judgment.  On  the  9th  of  March  his  Lordship, 
sitting  at  Lambeth  Palace,  gave  judgment.  He  de- 
nied that  any  new  and  independent  court  had  been 
created  by  the  Public  Worship  Eegulation  Act, 
and  justified  himself  for  sitting  at  Lambeth.  And 
with  regard  to  the  case  then  before  him,  he  pro- 
nounced that  on  the  17th  of  the  previous  July 
Mr.  Edwards  had  been  proved  guilty  of  certain 
departures  from  the  authorised  ceremonials  of 
the  Church.  He  required  an  affidavit  to  be  filed 
showing  that  since  the  decree  then  pronounced 
Mr.  Edwards  had  not  discontinued  the  practices  in 
question ;  and  when  that  affidavit  had  been  filed 
he  would  suspend  Mr.  Edwards  for  six  months. 
Mr.  Edwards  was  to  pay  the  costs  of  these  pro- 
ceedings. On  the  23rd  of  March,  accordingly, 
an  affidavit  was  brought,  signed  by  Combe  the 
promoter,  and  another  person  named  Wheeler ; 
and  Lord  Penzance  thereupon  sentenced  Mr. 
Edwards  to  be  suspended  for  six  months  from 
Sunday,  the  31st,  and  to  pay  the  costs.  This 
sentence  was  served  on  Mr.  Edwards  on  that  same 
Sunday,  being  affixed  to  the  door  of  Prestbury 

The  Bishop  of  Gloucester  and  Bristol  sent  a 
clergyman  named  Lyne  to  do  Mr.  Edwards's  duty. 
Mr.  Edwards,  however,  insisted  on  doing  it  him- 
self, on  the  ground  that  Lord  Penzance,  having  no 


spiritual  jurisdiction,  could  not  canonically  sus- 
pend him,  and  Mr.  Lyne  was  sent,  with  all  civility, 
about  his  business. 

The  terms  of  Mr.  Combe's  affidavit,  on  which 
the  court  proceeded,  were,  we  suppose,  not  such 
as  English  courts  had  ever  before  consented  to 
receive.  They  ran  thus :  "I,  the  said  Charles 
Combe,  for  myself  say  that  I  have  not  been  in  the 
habit  of  attending  Divine  Service  in  the  said 
parish  church  of  Prestbury  for  some  years  past, 
and  /  cannot  therefore  state  of  my  own  knowledge 
whether  the  practices  above  mentioned  have  been 
of  constant  occurrence  there,  but  /  have  been  in- 
formed by  several  persons  who  have  regularly 
attended  Divine  Service  in  the  said  church  that 
all  such  practices  have  been  usual  in  the  said 
church,  but  such  persons  are  adherents  of  the  said 
Eev.  John  Edwards  the  younger,  and  will  not  give 
evidence  voluntarily  against  him  in  this  case." 

In  the  ensuing  week,  however,  a  new  move  was 
made  by  Mr.  Edwards's  enemies,  the  result  of  which 
Mr.  Edwards  himself  shall  relate,  as  he  related  it 
in  a  letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  : — "  It 
was  on  Passion  Sunday  morning,  the  second  Sun- 
day of  my  suspension,  in  1878,  that,  without  the 
slightest  warning,  we  found  our  ordinary  devout 
and  quiet  congregation  supplemented  by  an  evi- 
dently organised  band  of  strange,  rough  men,  who 
filled  every  vacant  place,  and  thronged  the  aisles 
of  the  church.  On  ascending  the  pulpit  to  preach, 
at  the  conclusion  of  the  Mcene  Creed,  I  found 
myself  confronted  by  a  perfect  sea  of  strange,  for- 
bidding faces,  mingled  with,  or   hemming  in,  in 


strongest  contrast  with  them,  the  dear  famihar  ones. 
I  had  not  gone  on  far  with  my  sermon,  when 
suddenly  there  broke  forth,  in  horrid  and  evident 
concert,  a  loud,  sustained  shout  from  many  throats. 
And  then,  as  suddenly,  all  was  still.  Thankful 
am  I  to  Him  Who  sustained  me  in  that  trying 
hour  that  neither  courage  nor  self-possession  for  one 
moment  forsook  me.  When  silence  was  restored, 
I  spoke  to  them  solemnly  of  Death,  Judgment,  and 
the  Life  to  come.  They  listened  with  marked  at- 
tention, and,  the  sermon  ended,  the  Holy  Service 
proceeded  without  further  interruption  to  its  close. 
No  little  indignation,  as  may  be  supposed,  was 
aroused  in  the  parish,  and  no  little  curiosity  excited 
as  to  the  cause  and  objects  of  this  profane  and  un- 
seemly demonstration.  '  Who  were  they  ?  Wlience 
did  they  come  ?  Why  did  they  come  ?  What 
good  did  they  get  by  coming  ?  Who  sent  them  ? 
who  paid  them  ?  '  were  questions  freely  and  often 
asked  ;  but  only  Echo  answered.  It  remains  to  this 
day  a  dark  and  dreadful  mystery."  * 

On  the  11th  of  May,  Dr.  Deane,  on  the  part  of 
the  prosecution,  moved  Lord  Penzance  to  order 
that  the  sentence  of  suspension  previously  issued 
should  be  enforced,  that  such  further  steps  should 
be  taken  as  justice  might  require,  and  that  Mr. 
Edwards  should  be  condemned  in  the  costs  of  these 
proceedings.  On  this  occasion  he  stated  that  Mr. 
Edwards,  in  refusing  to  allow  the  Eev.  Charles 
Eichard  Nunez  Lyne  to  minister  in  his  stead,  had 

*  St.  Mary's,  P7-€stbiiry.  The  Prosecution.  ...  By  John 
Baghot  de  la  Bere,  M.A.  (formerly  Edwards),  2nd  edition,  London, 
1881,  pp.  30,  31. 


used  language  of  shocking  profanity.  Those  who 
remember  what  Mr.  Edwards's  antecedents  had  been 
will  probably  think  that  Dr.  Deane's  ideas  of  pro- 
fanity differed  from  the  ideas  entertained  by  ordi- 
nary people.  Wliat  Mr.  Edwards  said  was,  "  This 
church  is  not  without  a  pastor,  and  I  am  determined 
to  resist  any  intrusion  into  my  church,  and  I  will 
undertake  to  conduct  the  services  myself,  in  the 
name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost."  *  Lord  Penzance  ordered  that  Mr. 
Edwards's  disobedience  should  be  signified  to  the 
Court  of  Chancery  forthwith ;  and  condemned  Mr. 
Edwards  in  costs.  This  was  to  enable  Mr.  Edwards's 
enemies  to  get  him  imprisoned ;  a  step,  however, 
which  those  wicked  men  dared  not  take.  The 
decree  of  the  court  was  not  to  be  drawn  up  until 
a  supplementary  affidavit  had  been  brought  into 
the  registry  stating  how  the  notice  of  the  court's 
motion  had  been  served  on  the  defendant.  But  in 
point  of  fact  no  application  was  made  for  the  writ 
of  significavit  until  after  the  legal  limit  of  ten  days 
had  elapsed. 

Early  in  this  year  (1878)  the  Bishop  of  London 
(Dr.  Jackson)  refused  not  only  not  to  license  any 
actual  member  of  the  Society  of  the  Holy  Cross, 
but  even  to  allow  any  exchange  when  one  of  the 
parties  was,  or  had  lately  been,  connected  with 
that  Society. f  The  prosecution  of  Mr.  Mackonochie 
was  still  going  on,  as  we  have  now  to  see. 

On  the  18  th  of  March  Mr.  Mackonochie  was 
served  with  a  citation  to  appear  before  Lord  Pen- 

*   Church  Times,  April  5,  1878,  p.  192. 
t  Ih.  for  February  1,  1878. 


zance,  but  did  not  do  so.  And  on  the  23rd  Dr. 
Stephens,  on  the  part  of  the  nominal  prosecutor, 
Mr.  Martin,  apphed  to  the  court  to  enforce  the 
monition  issued  in  June  1875  by  Sir  Eobert  Phil- 
limore,  then  Dean  of  Arches ;  Mr.  Mackonochie 
having,  it  was  said,  disobeyed  that  monition  in 
four  respects  :  by  wearing  the  Eucharistic  vest- 
ments, by  singing  the  Ag7ius  Dei  after  the  conse- 
cration of  the  elements  and  before  the  Communion, 
by  signing  the  cross  towards  the  congregation  at 
various  times,  and  by  kissing  the  service-book. 
Lord  Penzance,  however,  ordered  another  moni- 
tion to  be  issued,  and  that  Mr.  Mackonochie  should 
pay  the  costs  of  this  application.  It  may  be  noted 
that  the  five  persons  on  whose  affidavits  the  monition 
was  granted  were  so  far  from  being  aggrieved 
parishioners,  or  indeed  from  being  parishioners  at 
all,  that  they  resided  in  the  three  districts  of  St. 
James's,  Tufnell  Park,  and  Hammersmith.*  On 
tlie  29th  the  second  monition  was  served  as  ordered 
upon  Mr.  Mackonochie,  warning  him  to  abstain 
from  the  practices  specified  in  the  previous  one. 
Mr.  Mackonochie  received  also  a  further  notice 
citing  him  to  appear  before  Lord  Penzance  on  the 
11th  of  May ;  but  as  he  again  failed  to  appear, 
application  was  made  by  Dr.  Stephens  on  the  part 
of  Mr.  Martin  for  the  enforcement  of  certain  moni- 
tions already  issued  by  Lord  Penzance  against  him, 
for  further  order  to  be  taken  by  the  court  accord- 
ing to  the  requirements  of  justice,  and  for  the  con- 
demnation of  Mr.  Mackonochie  in  the  costs  of  these 
proceedings.     Lord  Penzance  said  that  the  court 

*  Church  Times,  March  29,  1878. 


would  consider  what  course  to  take,  and  on  the  1st 
of  June  passed  upon  Mr.  Mackonochie  a  sentence  of 
suspension  ah  officio  et  benejicio  for  three  years,  and 
condemned  him  in  costs.  On  the  following  Sunday 
morning  it  was  noticed  that  one  of  the  Lessons  for 
the  day  had  in  it  the  following  passage :  "  They 
shall  put  you  out  of  the  synagogues  ;  yea,  the  time 
Cometh  that  whosoever  killeth  you  will  think  that 
he  doetli  God  service.  And  these  things  will  they 
do  unto  you,  because  they  have  not  known  the 
Father  nor  Me."  Mr.  Mackonochie  took  no  notice 
of  the  sentence  ;  and  a  few  days  later  he  applied 
to  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench  for  a  rule  of  pro- 
hibition ao'ainst  Lord  Penzance,  on  the  ground 
that  whereas  the  invariable  punishment  for  con- 
tempt of  court  was  fine  or  imprisonment,  and  such 
punishment  could  only  be  imposed  by  the  civil 
courts,  Lord  Penzance  had  not  adopted  that  mode. 
The  case  was  argued  on  the  27th  and  28th  of  June, 
before  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  (Sir  Alexander  Cock- 
burn),  Mr.  Justice  Mellor,  and  Mr.  Justice  Lush, 
and  judgment  was  given  on  the  8th  of  August. 
It  was  decided  (Mr.  Justice  Lush  dissenting)  that 
Lord  Penzance  had  gone  beyond  the  limits  of  his 
power  ;  that  Mr.  Mackonochie's  suspension  was  both 
irregular  and  inoperative ;  and  that  the  rule  must 
therefore  be  made  absolute. 

Eeverting  now  to  the  case  of  Mr.  Baghot  de  la 
Bere,  formerly  Edwards,  we  have  to  narrate  that  on 
the  12th  of  June  Lord  Penzance  sat  again  in  Lam- 
beth Palace  Library,  and  was  moved  as  on  the  last 
occasion.  He  declined,  however,  to  comply  with  the 
motion.     He  would,  he  said,  have  been  prepared 


to  order  the  issue  of  a  signijicavit,  the  result  of 
which  would  have  been  Mr.  Edwards's  imprison- 
ment. But  owing  to  the  action  of  the  Court  of 
Queen's  Bench  in  the  case  of  "  a  gentleman  named 
Mackonochie,"  he  thought  it  his  duty  to  forbear 
from  taking  any  further  steps  at  present,  although 
satisfied  in  his  own  mind  that  his  decree  suspend- 
ing Mr.  Edwards  was  valid.  On  the  2nd  of  Novem- 
ber, however,  Lord  Penzance  sitting  again  at  Lam- 
beth, gave  judgment;  and  took  the  opportunity 
of  criticising  the  judgment  which  the  Lord  Chief 
Justice  had  delivered  on  the  8th  of  August,  as 
noticed  before ;  pronouncing  it  to  be  "  based  upon 
serious  misconceptions  of  fact  and  equally  grave 
misinterpretations  of  the  law ;  "  and  proceeding 
thereupon  to  argue  in  support  of  his  own  position. 
On  account,  however,  of  the  decision  of  the  Court 
of  Queen's  Bench,  he  declined  to  proceed  to  com- 
pulsory measures  against  Mr.  Baghot  de  la  Bere  for 
the  present. 

Sir  Alexander  Cockburn  was  roused  by  Lord 
Penzance's  attack  to  reply  to  the  noble  Lord ;  and 
he  did  reply  in  a  letter  to  the  offender,  dated  the 
10th  of  December,  of  which  letter  Lord  Penzance, 
after  (we  presume)  having  read  a  few  sentences, 
deemed  it  best  to  leave  the  greater  part  unread ; 
on  the  same  principle  on  which  Sir  Joshua  Eeynolds, 
when  in  conversation  a  remark  was  made  at  which 
he  might  have  been  expected  to  take  offence,  and 
to  which,  therefore,  he  was  willing  to  be  deaf, 

"  Shifted  his  trumpet,  and  only  took  snuff." 

And  the  noble  Lord  had  reason  ;  for  after  the  Lord 


Chief  Justice  had  noticed  the  "  offensive  and  un- 
provoked attack  "  upon  himself,  and  how  his  aro-u- 
ments  had  been  "  systematically  perverted  and 
misrepresented  for  the  purpose  of  appearing  to 
refute  them,  as  also,  it  would  seem,  for  the  uno-ene- 
rous  purpose  of  holding  "  him  "  up  to  contempt 
and  ridicule,"  and  after  he  had  remarked  on  Lord 
Penzance's  judgment  as  "  the  first  instance  in  our 
judicial  annals  in  which  a  judge  whose  decision 
has  been  overruled  on  appeal  or  arrested  by  pro- 
hibition, instead  of  abiding  the  decision  of  a  superior 
appellate  tribunal,  has,  on  a  similar  case  presentino- 
itself,  availed  himself  of  the  opportunity  to  rail  at 
the  judgment  which  has  superseded  his  own,"  and 
as  "  the  first  instance  of  a  difference  of  judicial 
opinion  being  made  the  occasion  of  a  personal  and 
hostile  attack," — Sir  Alexander  proceeded  to  say, 
"  I  readily  agree  that  no  man  can  be  better  qualified 
than  your  Lordship  to  speak  as  to  the  inconvenience 
and  embarrassment  of  having  to  administer  a  law 
with  which  one  is  not  familiar.  Having  been  brought 
up  to  Common  Law,  and  never  having  practised  in 
the  ecclesiastical  courts,  your  Lordship  took  upon 
yourself  the  ofiice  of  an  ecclesiastical  judge ;  and 
I  dare  say  thus  acquired  practical  experience  of  the 
difficulty  which  most  people  would  labour  under 
in  such  a  position."  * 

Against  the  writ  of  prohibition  granted  by  the 
Court  of  Queen's  Bench  against  Lord  Penzance  two 
appeals  were  lodged:  one  on  behalf  of  Mr.  Martin, 

*  A  Letter  to  ...  .  Lord  Penza/nce  .  ...  on  his  Judgment  in 
the  Case  of  Combe  v.  Edwards.  By  the  Lord  Chief  Justice 
London,  1878,  p.  27. 


and  tlie  other  on  behalf  of  Lord  Penzance  ;  and 
on  March  10,  1879,  the  Court  of  Appeal,  consist- 
ing of  Lord  Coleridge  and  Lords  Justices  James, 
Brett,  Cotton,  and  Thesiger,  sat  to  hear  them.  The 
arguments  lasted  several  days,  and  were  not  con- 
cluded until  the  19tli.  Judgment  M^as  given  on 
the  28th  of  June,  reversing  the  judgment  of  the 
Queen's  Bench.  After  some  further  delay,  it  was 
announced  that  no  costs  were  to  be  given  on  either 
side  of  the  cause  in  the  Queen's  Bench  Division  ; 
the  appellants,  however,  were  to  have  their  costs 
of  appeal.  Meanwhile  Mr.  Mackonochie  had  held 
on  his  course  without  troubling  himself  about  Lord 
Penzance  or  anybody  else  ;  but  on  the  15th  of 
November,  1879,  Lord  Penzance  decreed  that  the 
sentence  of  three  years'  suspension  should  take 
effect  from  Sunday,  the  23rd ;  and  on  that  day  the 
sentence  was  duly  served  on  Mr.  Mackonochie ; 
who,  however,  went  through  the  day's  duties  not- 

It  may  be  noticed  here  that  a  memorial  got  up 
in  the  year  1878  against  the  Theological  College 
at  Cuddesdon  was  signed  by  only  450  church- 
wardens out  of  more  than  1,300. 

On  the  17th  of  January,  1880,  the  "  Church 
Association,"  using  Mr.  Martin's  name,  commenced 
a  third  suit  against  the  Vicar  of  St.  Alban's,  Hol- 
born,  praying  for  his  deprivation ;  this  course  being 
deemed,  in  the  interests  of  the  Association,  more 
suitable  than  getting  Lord  Penzance's  sentence  of 
suspension  enforced  by  imprisonment.  Mr.  Jeune, 
the  counsel  for  the  prosecution,  stated  that  the 
object  of  the  present  suit  was  not  to  enforce  sus- 


pension,  but  to  punish  for  contempt.  And  if  he 
could  have  been  compelled  to  state,  further,  why 
the  promoters  had  this  latter  object  in  view  rather 
than  the  former,  he  would  probably  have  had  to 
say  that  while  the  general  public  would  probably 
acquiesce  in  Mr.  Mackonochie's  deprivation,  his  im- 
prisonment would  cause  such  an  outcry  through- 
out the  Church  of  England  as  the  "  Church  Asso- 
ciation "  would  not  desire  to  encounter. 

Lord  Penzance  did  not  like  the  prospect  of  a 
new  suit ;  but  he  allowed  the  citation  in  the  new 
suit  to  be  issued.  On  the  6th  of  March,  sitting  in 
the  library  of  Lambeth  Palace,  he  was  asked  to 
admit  twenty-four  articles  which  had  been  filed  by 
the  promoter  against  Mr.  Mackonochie ;  and  which, 
said  Mr.  Jeune,  concluded  with  what  was  not  very 
usual,  viz.  a  prayer.  This,  the  learned  counsel 
afterwards  explained,  was  a  prayer  for  Mr.  Mac- 
konochie's deprivation.  With  the  omission  of  the 
twenty-first  article,  charging  the  defendant  with 
taking  the  eastward  position,  and  some  re-num- 
bering, and  likewise  some  verbal  alterations.  Lord 
Penzance  saw  no  ground  of  objection  in  the 
articles,  and  ordered  their  admission. 

On  the  6th  of  April,  however,  notice  was  given 
of  an  appeal  to  the  House  of  Lords  on  behalf  of 
Mr.  Mackonochie  ;  and  notice  of  the  same  was 
duly  served  on  Lord  Penzance  and  Mr.  Martin. 
On  the  8th  of  April,  Lord  Penzance,  sitting  in  the 
library  of  Lambeth  Palace,  commenced  hearing 
the  new  suit :  and  this  time  the  suit  was  not  under 
the  Public  Worship  Eegulation  Act,  but  under  the 
earlier  Church  Discipline  Act.     On  this  occasion 

384  SPIES. 

the  evidence  of  two  spies  was  taken  :  the  spies 
being  W.  G.  Bunn  of  Hammersmith,  and  F.  E. 
Jones  of  Maida  Vale.  And  on  the  5th  of  June, 
Lord  Penzance  decreed  that  the  articles  admitted 
had  been  proved,  but  forbore  to  pronounce  that 
Mr.  Mackonochie  had  offended  against  the  laws 
ecclesiastical,  or  to  punish  him  in  any  way  save 
condemning  him  in  costs.  Against  this  judgment 
notice  of  appeal  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  Privy 
Council  was  entered  in  Mr.  Martin's  name.  But  on 
the  14th  of  the  same  month  Mr.  Martin  wrote  to 
the  Bishop  of  London  disclaiming  all  intention  of 
appealing  against  Lord  Penzance's  judgment.  Li 
April  1881  the  House  of  Lords  confirmed  the  de- 
cision of  the  Court  of  Appeal  in  the  earlier  suit, 
and  concerning  which  the  notice  had  been  given 
some  twelve  months  before. 

In  February  1882  Mr.  Martin's  appeal  to  the 
Judicial  Committee  was  heard  before  the  Lord 
Chancellor  (Lord  Selborne),  Lord  Spencer,  the 
Archbishop  of  York,  Lord  Blackburn,  Lord  Wat- 
son, Sir  Barnes  Peacock,  Sir  James  Hannen,  and 
Sir  Eobert  Collier  ;  the  Bishops  of  Durham  (Dr. 
Lightfoot),  Winchester  (Dr.  Harold  Browne),  and 
Lichfield  (Dr.  Maclagan)  being  present  as  ecclesias- 
tical assessors.  Judgment  was  given  the  same  day  : 
Lord  Penzance's  judgment  was  to  be  reversed,  and 
the  case  remitted  again  to  him. 

On  the  17th  of  April  an  official  statement  was 
made,  and  appeared  in  print,  that  no  further  pro- 
ceedings had  been  taken.  We  shall  see  hereafter 
how  the  case  ended. 

This  will  be  the  most  convenient  place  for  men- 

\\'YCLIFFE    HALL,    OXFORD.  385 

tioning  the  establishment  of  two  Low-Church  halls 
— one  at  Oxford,  and  the  other  at  Cambridge.  The 
former,  Wyclifie  Hall,  was  commenced  at  the  end 
of  1877,  as  a  Low-Church  institution  of  the  best 
character;  i.e.  inculcating  an  exact  and  devotional 
study  of  the  Bible  as  a  whole,  coupled  with  a 
personal  use  of  God's  grace,  but  not  seeking  to 
enforce  Low-Church  opinions  in  any  way.*  The 
object  of  its  promoters  was  to  meet  the  require- 
ments of  persons  looking  forward  to  Holy  Orders, 
and  who,  having  taken  University  degrees,  wished 
to  continue  their  studies  at  Oxford.  The  govern- 
ing  body  was  a  council,  formed  at  a  preliminary 
meeting  of  persons  interested  in  the  scheme  ;  and 
included  at  its  formation,  or  soon  after,  at  least 
four  persons  who  were  or  had  been  members  of  the 
"  Church  Association."  It  filled  up  vacancies  in 
its  own  body  as  vacancies  arose.  No  authorities 
in  the  Church  or  diocese  were  ex  officio  members 
of  it.  The  course  of  instruction  included,  as  its 
leading  features.  Biblical  theology,  based  on  a 
comprehensive  study  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments, Christian  evidences,  and  exercises  in  reading 
and  preaching.  The  requirements  of  candidates 
for  theological  honours,  and  of  such  as  wished  to 
pass  the  preliminary  examination  for  Holy  Orders, 
were   also  borne  in  mind.     A  shortened   service 

*  "If  the  word"  [party]  "is  used as  implying  fixed 

opinions  on  all  theological  and  Church  questions,  and  a  consequent 
condemnation  of  those  who  differ,  we  cannot  lay  claim  to  it.  Such 
a  spirit  would  be  aUen  to  the  objects  for  which  Wyclifife  Hall  was 
founded." — Four  Years'  Work  at  Wy cliff e  Hall,  p.  3.  For  infor- 
mation concerning  the  Hall  I  am  indebted  to  the  kindness  of  the 
Principal,  the  Kev.  R.  B.  Girdlestone. 

II.  26 


from  the  Prayer-book  was  used  each  morning  in 
the  Ubrary  and  lecture-room.  The  first  Principal 
was  the  Eev.  Eobert  Baker  Girdlestone,  author  of 
The  Synonyms  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  other 

Eidley  Hall,  Cambridge,  was  opened  in  January 
1881.  Its  governing  body,  like  that  of  Wycliffe 
Hall,  Oxford,  was  a  council,  elected  in  the  first 
place  by  a  body  of  subscribers,  and  subsequently 
co-optative ;  and  no  authority  in  the  Church  was 
ex  officio  a  member.  The  students,  being  still 
members  of  their  several  colleges  in  the  Uni- 
versity, were  free  to  attend  their  several  college 
chapels ;  but  for  residents,  a  shortened  form  of 
Mattins  was  said  in  the  library  daily,  and  followed 
by  an  exposition  of  the  Greek  Testament ;  and 
instead  of  Evensong  a  sort  of  "family  prayer." 
The  first  Principal  was  the  Eev.  Handley  Carr 
Glyn  Moule,  contributor  to  Smith's  Dictionary  of 
Christian  Biography,  and  author  of  various  poems 
and  other  works.* 

*  For  information  concerning  Eidley  Hall,  I  am  indebted  to  the 
kindness  of  the  Principal,  the  Eev.  H.  C.  G.  Moule. 

ST.  Peter's,  London  docks.  387 


Immoral  Period,  continued.  St.  Peter's,  London  Docks.  Attempts 
of  the  "  Church  Association  "  to  molest  the  Clergy  there.  Failure. 
Subsequent  Conduct  of  the  Association. 

"  Quid.  .  .  .  tam  malignum  quam  noUe  prodesse,  cum  possis, 
quam  utiUtate  cruciari,  quam  injuriam  sinere?" — Teetullian, 
Adv.  Marc.  i.  22. 

Our  readers  will  not  have  forgotten  the  account 
which  we  gave  of  the  way  in  which  Catholicism 
was  suppressed  in  the  year  1860  in  the  Church 
of  St.  George-in-the-East,  after  a  course  of  sacri- 
legious ruffianism,  abetted  both  by  the  Bishop  of 
the  diocese,  and  also  by  the  Government.  Happily, 
the  suppression  of  Catholicism  in  that  church  did 
not  involve  the  suppression  of  Catholicism  through- 
out the  parish.  A  mission  had  been  established 
in  Wellclose  Square,  under  energetic  clergy ;  and 
one  result  had  been  the  formation  of  a  district 
parish,  with  a  new  church,  known  as  that  of  St. 
Peter,  London  Docks.  The  Eev.  Charles  Fuge 
Lowder  was  instituted  as  its  first  incumbent.  Mr. 
Lowder  had  served  as  curate  of  the  mother-church 
in  the  days  of  Mr.  Bryan  King.  The  congregation 
gathered  under  him  had  been  trained  from  the 
first  in  Catholic  belief  and  Catholic  practice ;  and 
few  priests,  we  suppose,  have  succeeded  in  winning 
the  love  of  their  flocks  as  fully  as  Mr.  Lowder 
had  succeeded  in  winning  the  love  of  his.  The 
ritual,  however,  at  St.  Peter's  Church  was  of  the 
most  extreme  character.  We  suppose  that  every 
mediaeval  usage  was  adopted  which  could  on  anv 


388  ST.  Peter's,  London  docks. 

pretence,  however  strained,  be  deemed  consistent 
with  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer :  Eoman  prece- 
dent, however,  being  preferred  to  that  of  Sarum 
where  there  was  a  difference.  The  reason  of  this 
probably  was,  that  the  Eoman  usages  were  gene- 
rally of  a  less  elaborate  character  than  those  of 
Sarum,  although  English  Churchmen  might  have 
been  expected  to  have  a  preference  for  the  latter, 
in  consequence  of  their  wide  acceptance  in  pre- 
Eeformation  times,  and  of  their  affording  a  testi- 
mony to  the  independence  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 

The  con^reofation  of  St.  Peter's  was  not  an  in- 
fluential  one,  save  in  those  ranks  from  which  it 
was  mainly  drawn,  and  in  that  neighbourhood — 
one  of  the  worst  in  London — where  it  was  known. 
It  may,  indeed,  be  questioned  whether  any  person 
resident  within  the  district  (except  the  clergy  and 
the  Sisters  of  Mercy)  had  sufficient  knowledge  of 
Church  matters  for  telling  the  difference  between 
the  "  Church  Association  "  and  the  English  Church 
Union.  With  most  or  all  of  these  poor  people  the 
only  alternatives  were,  Catholicism  as  taught  by 
Mr.  Lowder,  and  practical  heathenism.  Nor,  even 
when  they  had  been  converted  to  the  former, 
could  they  be  expected  to  do  much  in  the  way  of 
making  other  converts  to  the  religion  which  they 
had  adopted. 

Hence  it  might  have  been  thought  that  St. 
Peter's,  London  Docks,  might  have  been  beneath 
the  notice  of  an  Association  which  had  its  office 
running  out  of  the  Strand  ;  and  that  its  priests 
and  people  might  have  been  let  alone  to  go  on  in 


their  own  ways,  especially  if  the  Bishop  was  dis- 
inclined to  interfere.  The  "  Church  Association," 
however,  took  a  different  view.  Their  object  was 
not  to  leave  a  single  Eitualist  unmolested  through- 
out the  Church  of  England  ;  and  every  Eitualistic 
church,  however  practically  insignificant,  was  as  a 
thorn  in  their  sides,  the  cause  of  a  perpetual  irrita- 
tion. We  now  transcribe  a  few  passages  from  Mr. 
Lowder's  biography,  which  have  respect  to  the 
year  1869  : — 

"  The  '  Church  Association '  tried  in  vain  for 
eight  months  during  this  year  to  discover  and 
utilise  an  'aggrieved  parishioner.'  Possibly  the  in- 
surmountable difficulty  of  the  attempt  may  have 
been  enhanced  by  the  dangers  to  which  the  ag- 
grieved one  would  have  been  exposed.  It  would 
not  have  been  an  enviable  office  amongst  people 
who  plainly  said  that  any  folks  who  came  down 
there  to  worry  '  the  Father  '  would  be  thrown  into 
the  river  by  the  men,  and  have  their  eyes  scratched 
out  by  the  women.  '  Let  them  come  on,  we're 
ready  for  'em,'  a  sturdy  farrier  was  heard  to  say, 
baring  a  formidable  arm.  '  I  took  my  pattens  to 
church,'  an  old  woman  said  to  the  Sisters,  '  and 
kept  them  in  my  lap,  ready  to  heave  at  them  if 
they  came  near  him.' 

"  Mr,  Linklater  gives  the  following  account  of 
the  matter : — 

" '  Many  an  attempt  was  made  by  the  Church 
Association  to  attack  such  an  important  strong- 
hold, but  with  no  success.  Their  agents  had  been 
down  frequently  to  stir  up  strife  and  try  to  get 
some  of  the  parishioners  to  lend  their  names  to  the 


proceedings  against  Mr.  Lowder.  But  for  a  long 
time  it  seemed  hopeless.  It  was  commonly  said  in 
the  parish  that  money  was  offered  for  the  accom- 
modation. At  last  three  persons,  none  of  whom 
ever  attended  the  church,  and  two  of  whom  were 
Dissenters,  one  being  a  preacher  in  the  next  parish, 
were  pressed  into  the  service.  Mr.  Lowder  told 
me,  shortly  before  his  death,  with  the  most  charm- 
ing orlee,  that  he  had  made  friends  with  the  two 
persons  who  were  most  bitter  enemies  in  the 
matter.' "  * 

Mr.  Linklater  continues,  as  his  words  are  given 
in  Mr.  Lowder's  biography  : — 

"  '  Two  spies  of  the  Church  Association  appeared 
one  day  in  the  front  seats  and  began  taking  notes  ; 
and  I  am  sorry  to  say  that  our  churchwarden,  who 
is  a  most  respected  lighterman,  walked  up  quietly 
to  these  gentlemen,  and  whispered,  "  If  you  go  on 
with  this  'ere,  there's  half-a-dozen  men  behind  you 
will  crack  your  heads."  The  note-books  were  put 
up  at  once. 

"  '  A  visit  from  the  Deptford  mob  to  St.  Peter's 
had  been  threatened,  to  avenge  the  protection 
given  by  our  people  to  Mr.  Tooth.  There  was  the 
greatest  excitement  in  our  parish,  and  each  Sun- 
day the  church  was  crammed  with  our  own  men, 
determined  to  protect  the  sanctity  of  the  house  of 
God.     The  rioters  never  dared  to  come. 

"  '  On  one  of  the  saints'  days  an  agitator  appeared 
at  the  children's  service,  and  when  it  was  over  he 
shouted  out  in  church,  "  Wliat  would  Eidley  think 

*  Charles  Lowder :  a  Biography,  London,  1881,  pp.  241-2. 

"OLD   BOB   RIDLEY."  391 

of  this  ? "  The  children  were  much  astonished, 
and  did  not  understand  the  allusion,  so  after 
church  they  followed  the  gentleman  up  the  street, 
singing,  "  I'm  old  Bob  Eidley,  0,"  the  only  Eidley 
they  had  ever  heard  of.  He  never  came  again.'  "  * 
Two  presentments,  however,  were  got  up  against 
Mr.  Lowder ;  though,  again,  these  were  not  in  the 
way  of  prosecution,  but  only  asking  the  Bishop  to 
use  fatherly  methods  for  inducing  Mr.  Lowder  to 
conform  to  Privy  Council  law.  This,  however,  it 
need  not  be  said,  Mr.  Lowder  did  not  dream  of 
doing ;  for,  on  the  one  hand,  he  had  never  pro- 
mised to  conform  to  whatever  the  Judicial  Com- 
mittee might  choose  to  declare  as  law,  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  he  had  promised  very  solemnly  to 
conform  to  the  rules  of  the  Prayer-book.  Then, 
on  the  15th  of  November,  1878,  a  representation 
was  sent  up  under  the  Public  Worship  Eegulation 
Act,  by  three  persons,  whose  names  have  not  trans- 
pired, but  who  posed  as  aggrieved  parishioners. 
In  this  representation  Mr.  Lowder  was  charged 
with  twenty  alleged  illegalities,  including  "  proces- 
sions, useless  candles,  Eomish  vestments  [probably 
the  Eucharistic  vestments],  wafers,  mixture  of  wine 
and  water,  hiding  the  manual  acts,  elevation,  bow- 
ing, crossing,  kissing  [probably  kissing  the  Gospel], 
censing,  ringing  [probably  at  the  consecration  of 
the  elements],  and  singing  the  Agnus  Dei ;  also 
setting  up  in  the  church  a  second  so-called  altar,  a 
confessional  box,  a  set  of  pictures  called  the  Sta- 
tions of  the  Cross,  a  cross  on  the  Communion-table, 

*  Charles  Lowder  :  a  Biography,  p.  244 


and  near  the  pulpit  a  crucifix  three  feet  long."  * 
This  representation,  however,  was  unsuccessful. 
The  Bishoj)  of  London  possessed  a  remote  interest 
in  the  patronage  of  the  benefice,  and  on  this  ac- 
count Bishop  Jackson  referred  the  representation 
to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (Dr.  Tait) ;  and 
the  Archbishop  put  his  veto  on  the  proceedings, 
on  the  ground  that  the  case  would  be  affected  by 
a  recent  decision  of  the  Queen's  Bench  Division  in 
the  case  of  Martin  v.  Mackonochie. 

While  on  the  subject  of  the  conduct  of  the 
"  Church  Association  "  with  respect  to  St.  Peter's, 
London  Docks,  it  is  sad  to  notice  how,  at  a  later 
period,  being  foiled  in  their  endeavours  to  stop 
the  Catholic  ritual  there  carried  on,  the  Associa- 
tion had  recourse  to  the  circulation  of  what  was 
tantamount  to  direct  falsehood.  It  is  well  known 
to  persons  who  are  acquainted  with  such  matters 
that,  with  reference  to  certain  minor  liturgical 
ceremonies  not  expressly  specified  in  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  two  sets  of  usages  obtain  in 
Catholic  churches  of  the  Anglican  rite — that  is  to 
say,  the  usage  of  Eome  and  that  of  Sarum ;  these 
usages  having  respect  to  the  colours  employed  in 
vesting  the  altar  and  ministers,  the  manner  of 
doing  reverence  at  certain  parts  of  the  service, 
and  such-like  matters,  which  the  Prayer-book 
leaves  without  making  any  specific  provision. 
For  instance,  on  some  days  the  altar  and  ministers 
will  be  vested  in  green  according  to  Eoman  usage, 
but  in  red  according^  to  the  usage  of  Sarum :  and 
at  some  part  of  the  service  the  reverence  will  be 

*  Beport  of  the  "  Church  Association  "  for  1883,  p.  41. 


done  by  genuflexion  according  to  Eome,  but,  ac- 
cording to  S?rum,  by  simply  bowing  the  head. 
Now  in  the  Times  of  Monday,  the  11th  of  February, 
1884,  an  account  had  been  given  of  the  service 
in  St.  Peter's  Church  on  the  Saturday  before ;  and 
the  reporter  stated  that  in  the  celebration  of  Holy 
Communion  the  Roman  use  toas  closely  followed. 
This  statement,  true,  no  doubt,  in  reference  to  that 
minute  ceremonial  whereto  we  have  just  referred, 
had  nevertheless  a  manifest  falsehood  when  placed 
before  the  general  public  without  qualification  or 
explanation :  for  it  would  manifestly  be  under- 
stood to  mean  that  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
had  been  for  the  time  laid  aside,  and  the  Eoman 
Missal  put  in  its  place.  In  this  unqualified  form, 
however,  the  Church  Association  was  not  ashamed 
to  publish  it  in  their  report  for  1883  ;  *  and  the 
lie  was  repeated  by  "  Church  Association  "  lecturers 
in  their  country  addresses. 

*  Page  42. 



Immoral  Period,  continued.  Various  Prosecutions  and  Attempts. 
Conduct  of  the  Eev.  R.  O.  T.  Thorpe.  More  Attempts  at  Prosecii- 
tion.  Low-Church  Conduct  at  the  Sheffield  Church  Congress. 
Prosecution  of  the  Eev.  P.  Ahier  for  speaking  ill  of  the  Bock. 

"  The  law  is  slacked,  and  judgment  doth  never  go  forth  :  for  the 
wicked  doth  compass  about  the  righteous  ;  therefore  wrong  judgment 
proceedeth." — Habakkuk  i.  4. 

The  persecution  of  Catholic  priests  by  Low- 
Churchmen  still  went  on.  We  are  now  at  the 
year  1878.  In  the  January  of  that  year  the  Eev. 
Charles  Norwood  Oliver,  Chaplain  of  the  Eoyal 
Hospital  for  Portsmouth,  Portsea,  and  Gosport,  had 
a  slight  experience  of  Low-Church  antagonism. 
Two  brother-clergymen  attended  the  annual  meet- 
ing of  the  subscribers,  and,  by  way  of  attacking 
Mr.  Oliver  for  his  High-Church  principles,  moved 
an  amendment  to  the  customary  vote  of  thanks 
to  the  officers  of  the  institution.  The  amendment, 
however,  was  lost.  Later  on  in  the  same  year, 
five  clergymen — Messrs.  Aldwell,  Boyce,  Goundry, 
Martin,  and  Parry — joined  with  three  Dissenting 
preachers  in  a  meeting  held  for  the  purpose  of 
attacking  the  same  gentleman  on  the  ground  of 
his  being  a  member  of  the  English  Church  Union, 
and  an  associate  of  the  Confraternity  of  the  Blessed 
Sacrament.  In  tlie  month  of  February  proceed- 
ings were  taken  by  the  "  Church  Association " 
against  the  Eev.  Tufnell  Samuel  Barrett,  Vicar 
of  St.  George's,  Barrow-in-Furness ;  and  certain 
parishioners  of  Barrow-in-Furness,  by  name  John 

REV.    T.    S.    BARRETT — REV.    C.    BODINGTON.  395 

Huddleston,    Eicliard    Fletcher    Towers,    George 
Joseph  Brooks  Sansam,  John  BaiUe  Bolton,  and 
Joseph    Pearson,    complained    to    the   Bishop    of 
Carlisle  (Dr.  Harvey  Goodwin)  on  account  of  the 
following    practices    adopted   by   Mr.    Barrett : — 
(1)  Use  of  lighted  candles,  (2)  use  of  a  stole,  and 
(apparently)  the    other  Eucharistic  vestments    as 
well,  (3)  bowing  or  prostration  during  the  Nicene 
Creed,  (4)  elevation  of  the  Eucharistic  elements, 
(5)  taking  the  eastward  position,   (6)  bowing  or 
prostration  during  the  Consecration-prayer,  (7)  use 
of  the  mixed  chalice,  (8)  signing  the  cross  towards 
the  congregation,  (9)  using  the  church-porch  as  a 
confessional.      The   Bishop    thereupon   prohibited 
Mr.  Barrett  from  the  second  and  ninth  of  these  prac- 
tices, but  refused  to  interfere  with  him  in  regard 
of  any  of  the  rest.     Afterwards  a  person  named 
Hurford  sent  in  a  representation  under  the  Public 
Worship  Eegulation  Act,  but  the  Bishop  refused 
to  allow  proceedings  to  be  taken.     As,  however, 
the  Bishop  had  required  Mr.  Barrett    to  disobey 
one  of  the  plain  directions  of  the  Prayer-book, 
Mr.  Barrett,  rather  than  break  his  promise  of  con- 
formity, and  not  being  prepared  to  make  fight, 
resigned  his  benefice. 

Another  attack  was  made  about  the  same  time 
upon  the  Eev.  Charles  Bodington,  Vicar  of  St. 
Andrew's,  Wolverhampton.  On  the  22nd  of 
January  a  third  representation  was  made  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  under  the  Public  Wor- 
ship Eegulation  Act,  by  Mr.  Joseph  Butcher,  one 
of  the  churchwardens,  asking  that  steps  might  be 
taken  for  compelling  Mr.  Bodington  to  desist  from 

396       KEV.    C.   BODINGTON. — REV.    G.    W.    BERKELEY. 

the  practices  whereof  complamt  had  been  made ; 
and  which  were,  (1)  the  use  of  "illegal"  vest- 
ments, (2)  the  use  of  altar-lights,  (3)  facing  east 
at  the  Consecration,  (4)  facing  east  at  the  Lord's 
Prayer  and  Collect  for  purity,  (5)  elevating  the 
paten  and  cup,  (6)  using  the  mixed  chalice,  (7) 
using  wafer-bread,  (8)  kneeling  and  bowing  in 
the  Consecration-prayer,  (9)  signing  the  cross 
toward  the  congregation,  (10)  "illegal"  proces- 
sions, (11)  singing  the  Agnus  Dei.  And  about 
the  same  time  the  vicars  and  churchwardens  of 
seven  Wolverhampton  churches  wrote  to  the 
Bishop  of  Lichfield  asking  him  to  deprive  Mr. 
Bodington  of  the  privilege  of  acting  upon  his  own 
conscientious  convictions.  The  Bishop,  however, 
replied  that  he  would  not  have  his  fatherly  ad- 
monition mixed  up  with  a  legal  process.  The 
Archbishop,  moreover,  refused  to  comply  with  the 
prosecutor's  wishes,  as  his  Grace's  suggestion  pre- 
viously made  had  not  been  acted  upon.*  It  is  to 
be  observed,  too,  that  the  Bishop  failed  to  send  Mr. 
Bodington  a  copy  of  the  representation  within  the 
prescribed  time ;  so  that  the  suit  would  have  failed 
on  that  account  alone. 

On  the  5  th  of  February  complaint  was  made 
to  the  Bishop  of  Eochester  (Dr.  Thorold)  against 
the  Eev.  George  William  Berkeley,  Vicar  of  All 
Hallows,  Southwark,  by  Alfred  Side,  of  128  Union 
Street,  Borough,  schoolmaster,  and  George  Newton, 
of  Union  Street,  Borough,  builder,  on  account  of 
the    following   practices : — (1)  Use    of    the   stole, 

*  Statement  of  the  "  Church  Association,"  cited  in  the  CMirch 
Times  of  January  17,  1879. 

EEV.    G.    W.    BERKELEY. — VEN.    E.    GLOVER.  397 

(2)  use  of  altar-lights ;  (3)  bowing  or  prostra- 
tion in  the  Nicene  Creed ;  (4)  elevation  of  the 
paten  and  cup  ;  (5)  the  eastward  position ;  (6) 
bowing  and  prostration  during  the  Consecration- 
prayer  ;  (7)  use  of  the  mixed  chalice ;  (8)  signing 
the  cross  on  his  forehead  and  towards  the  con- 
gregation in  the  Nicene  Creed,  in  the  Absolution, 
in  the  Communion-service,  and  before  or  after  the 
consecration  of  the  elements;  (9)  administering 
Holy  Communion  to  women  dressed  like  nuns,  and 
professing  to  be  Catholics  and  not  Protestants ; 
(10)  being  served  by  an  acolyte.  Subsequently 
eight  of  these  charges  were  repeated,  including 
the  first,  the  seventh,  the  eighth,  and  the  ninth. 
The  Bishop  desired  Mr.  Berkeley  to  desist  from 
the  use  of  the  mixed  chalice,  and  from  signing  the 
cross  in  the  manner  whereof  complaint  had  been 
made.  Mr,  Berkeley  promised  compliance,  and 
the  Bishop  thereupon  intimated  his  intention  of 
supporting  him.  In  a  printed  statement,  however, 
subsequently  issued,  the  "  Church  Association " 
falsely  asserted  that  Mr.  Berkeley  had  promised 
the  Bishop  to  discontinue  all  of  what  they  termed 
the  "  illegal  practices." 

On  the  28th  of  the  same  month  complaint  was 
made  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  against  the 
Ven.  Edward  Glover,  Vicar  of  Christ  Church, 
Wolverhampton,  and  who  had  been  formerly 
Archdeacon  of  Georgetown  in  South  Africa,  and 
Examining  Chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  Capetown, 
by  a  person  named  Howard  and  three  others, 
alleged  parishioners,  for — (1)  wearing  "illegal" 
vestments,  (2)  use  of  altar-Hghts,  (3)  taking  the 

398      CONDUCT  OF  THE  REV.  R.  O.  T.  THORPE. 

eastward  position  in  the  Consecration-prayer,  (4) 
using  the  mixed  chalice,  (5)  using  wafer-bread, 
(6)  "  illegal "  processions,  (7)  singing  the  Agnus 
Dei*  It  was  on  the  same  day  that  the  complaint 
had  been  preferred  against  Mr.  Bodington,  and  the 
suit  was  vetoed  by  the  Archbishop,  as  the  suit 
against  Mr.  Bodington  had  been  vetoed,  and  on 
similar  grounds.  The  new  Bishop  of  Lichfield 
(Dr.  Maclagan)  requested  Mr.  Glover  to  cease  using 
the  altar-lights,  the  mixed  chalice,  and  wafer-bread, 
but  refused  to  interfere  in  regard  of  the  other 
matters  of  complaint. 

About  the  same  time  there  was  such  an  ex- 
hibition of  hostility  on  the  part  of  an  individual 
against  the  Catholic  party  as  was  unusual  even 
among  Low-Churchmen,  who  were,  however,  be- 
coming bolder  as  the  persecution  went  on,  and 
as  it  was  favoured  by  those  in  authority.  The 
Eev.  Eichard  Oscar  Tugwell  Thorpe  was  Vicar  of 
Christ  Church,  Old  Kent  Eoad,  Camberwell.  The 
Bishop  of  Eochester  (Dr.  Thorold)  had  fixed  to 
hold  a  confirmation  in  that  church  ;  and  the  Eev. 
John  Going,  Vicar  of  St.  Paul's,  Walworth,  and 
the  Eev.  Eichard  Ehodes  Bristow,  Vicar  of  St. 
Stephen's,  Lewisham,  both  in  that  neighbourhood, 
had  written  to  Mr.  Thorpe  announcing  their  in- 
tention of  sending  candidates  ;  besides  which, 
Mr.  Bristow  had  asked  whether  he  should  bring 
surplice  or  gown.  Mr.  Thorpe  replied  that  he 
had  proclaimed  from  his  pulpit  the  opinion  that 
"  the  existence  of  secret  societies  of  the  character 

*  statement  of  the  "  Church  Association  "  cited  in  the  Church 
Times  of  January  17,  1879. 

ATTEMPT   AGAINST    THE    REV.    H.    E.    CHAPMAN.         399 

of  the  Society  of  the  Holy  Cross  and  of  the  Con- 
fraternity of  the  Blessed  Sacrament "  was  "  a 
scandal  and  a  shame  ;  "  and  that  he  had  expressed 
to  many  his  conviction  that  members  of  those 
societies  "  must  have  traitorous  designs  against  " 
the  Church  of  England.  (The  reader  will  note,  by 
the  way,  the  tacit  assumption  of  personal  infal- 
libility thus  made  ;  as  though  the  fact  of  a  Low- 
Church  clergyman's  having  said  a  thing  were  a 
sufficient  guarantee  of  the  certainty  of  the  thing 
affirmed.)  And  then,  after  informing  his  two 
clerical  brethren  severally  that  they  were  marked 
in  the  Rock's  list  of  "  conspirators  "  as  belonging 
to  the  obnoxious  societies,  he  added  that  there 
could  be  no  communion  between  him  and  them, 
and  that  he  could  not  with  any  comfort,  or  even 
honesty,  receive  their  Confirmation-candidates  ;  as 
if  the  admission  of  their  candidates  lay  within  his 
responsibility  at  all !  One  of  the  clergymen  thus 
addressed  having  replied  in  such  terms  as  the 
arrogant  impertinence  of  Mr.  Thorpe  deserved,  the 
latter  had  the  hardihood  to  rejoin  as  though  he 
were  an  injured  party.  The  matter  ended  by  the 
Bishop's  holding  the  Confirmation  in  Mr.  Bristow's 
church  instead  of  Mr.  Thorpe's.* 

In  the  month  of  April,  a  representation  was 
sent  to  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury  (Dr.  Moberly), 
charging  the  Eev.  Horace  Edward  Chapman, 
Eector  of  Donhead,  St.  Andrew's,  Salisbury,  with 
elevating  the  consecrated  elements ;  bowing  and 
prostration ;  intentional  hiding  of  the  manual  acts 
of  consecration ;  using  unleavened  bread,  dough. 

Church  Times,  February  8,  1878. 


or  wafers  ;  wearing  a  coloured  stole ;  using  the 
altar-liglits,  and  using  the  mixed  chalice.  The 
representation  (which  was  made  under  the  Pub- 
lic Worship  Eegulation  Act)  was  signed  by  Sir 
Thomas  Eraser  Grove,  Bart.,  Henry  Singleton,  and 
Walter  John  Grove  (apparently  the  eldest  son  of 
Sir  Thomas).  The  Bishop,  however,  refused  (April 
13)  to  allow  further  proceedings. 

On  the  24th  of  May  complaint  was  laid  against 
the  Eev.  George  Edward  Eedhead,  Vicar  of  St. 
Mary  Magdalene's,  Manningham,  near  Bradford,  in 
the  Diocese  of  Eipon,  by  Edwin  Wood,  William 
John  Elliott,  William  Thornton,  and  Alexander 
Eidding,  for  walking  in  procession,  use  of  altar- 
lights,  wearing  a  vestment  (probably  a  chasuble), 
facing  east,  using  the  mixed  chalice,  using  wafer- 
bread,  "bowing  to  consecrated  elements,"  sing- 
ing the  Agnus  Dei,  signing  the  cross  towards  the 
congregation,  removing  the  alms  to  the  credence 
instead  of  letting  them  remain  on  the  altar  till  tlie 
end  of  the  service,  and  allowing  a  cross  to  be 
over  the  Communion-table.  The  Bishop  of  Eipon 
(Dr.  Bickersteth)  informed  the  complainants  that 
he  had  not  succeeded  in  inducing  Mr.  Eedhead  to 
o-ive  up  the  practices  specified,  and  that  they  could 
proceed  under  the  Public  Worship  Eegulation  Act. 
Another  attempt  appears  to  have  been  made  by 
the  same  party  against  Mr.  Eedhead,  but  to  have 
failed  because  no  proceedings  could  be  taken  under 
the  Act  until  the  2nd  of  July,  1879 — a  year  after 
the  new  parish  had  been  constituted. 

In  the  month  of  June  a  presentment  was  made 
to  the  Bishop  of  London  against  the  Eev.  George 

THE    REV.    C.    3C0KLR    _iND   OTHERS.  401 

Booker,  j'erpetual  Curate  of  St.  John  the  Baptist, 
Kensington,  for  processions,  hghted  candles,  use  of 
a  vestment  (probably  a  chasuble),  removing  alms 
from  the  altar  to  the  credence,  facing  east  when 
consecrating  the  elements  (or,  as  the  "  Church 
Association  "  chose  to  express  it,  "  hiding  manual 
acts "),  elevation  of  the  elements,  mixing  water 
with  the  wine,  singing  the  Agnus  Dei,  ceremonial 
signing  of  the  cross  in  the  air,  and  the  use  of  a 
cross.  The  complainants  were  two  persons  named 
Bannister  and  Knight,  alleged  to  be  parishioners ; 
but  the  Bishop  appears  to  have  taken  no  notice  of 
their  presentment. 

About  the  same  time  complaints  were  made  to 
the  Bishop  of  Manchester  (Dr.  Fraser)  against  the 
Eev.  Francis  Hill  Arbuthnot  Wright,  Vicar  of  St. 
Mark's,  Pendleton,  Manchester,  for  introducing 
a  Litany-desk  and  the  Eucharistic  lights,  and  for 
raising  the  Communion-table  nine  inches,  thus  ne- 
cessitating its  approach  by  steps,  and  so  contra- 
vening the  precept  in  Exodus  xx.  26  !  * 

Probably  in  the  December  of  this  same  year 
(1878)  complaint  was  made  to  the  Bishop  of  Chi- 
chester (Dr.  Durnford)  against  the  Eev.  Eobert 
Biscoe  Tritton,  Vicar  of  Bognor,  for  the  eastward 
position ;  standing  west  of  the  table  at  the  Epistle 
and  Gospel ;  omitting  the  words  "  and  oblations  " 
from  the  Prayer  for  the  Whole  State  of  Christ's 
Church  (we  presume,  when  there  was   to  be  no 

*  "  Neither  shalt  thou  go  up  by  steps  unto  Mine  altar,  that  thy 
nakedness  be  not  discovered  thereon."  Apparently  Mr.  Wright's 
opponents  had  learnt  that  the  Communion-table  was  substantially 
an  altar. 

II.  27 

402     REV.    H.    B.    TRITTON. — SHEFFIELD    CHURCH    CONGRESS. 

celebration) ;  "  illegal  ordering  of  elements  ;  " 
"  at  the  Prayer  of  Consecration  hiding  manual 
acts  ;  "  "  bowing  to  a  metal  cross  on  Communion- 
table ;  "  "  introduction  of  a  cross  without  a  faculty  ; 
introduction  of  a  re-table  without  a  faculty ; 
concealment  of  the  Ten  Commandments;  Curate 
wearing  stole  ;  Curate  prostrating  himself;  "Vicar 
and  Curate  alleging  that  conduct  adjudged  to  be 
illegal  was  done  with  consent  of  the  Bishop."  (It 
will  be  noticed  how  eager  the  complainants  were, 
or  wished  to  seem,  against  the  publishing  of  any 
libellous  statement  against  their  right  reverend 
Father  in  God.  This  eagerness  was  not  always  mani- 
fested by  members  of  the  "  Church  Association.") 
The  persons  complaining  were,  a  Major-General 
F.  B.  Boleau,  alleged  to  be  a  parishioner,  and 
another  resident.  The  Bishop  replied  on  the  4th 
of  December,  refusing  to  take  order ;  and  on  the 
following  grounds  : — (1)  There  was  some  infor- 
mality in  the  presentment  itself;  (2)  one  of  the 
complainants  did  not  appear  to  have  sufficient 
interest  in  the  church ;  and  (3)  General  Boleau 
did  not  appear  to  have  frequented  the  services  of 
which  he  had  complained,  nor  to  have  the  general 
feeling  of  the  congregation  in  his  favour. 

The  Church  Congress  this  year  was  held  at 
Sheffield;  and  the  Vicar  of  Sheffield  (the  Eev. 
John  Edward  Blakeney)  and  his  friends  followed 
the  tactics  of  some  Low-Churchmen  at  a  former 
Congress,  and  endeavoured  to  exclude  from  the 
Subjects-Committee  all  clergymen  who  had  been 
the  subjects  of  Low-Church  prosecution  or  were 
members  of  the  Society  of  the  Holy  Cross.  In 
this,  however,  they  failed. 

PKOSECUTION    OF    THE    REV.    P.    AHIER.  403 

The  proceedings  of  the  Low-Church  party,  how- 
ever, were  diversified  this  year  with  a  prosecution 
of  a  different  character  from  most  of  those  de- 
scribed as  yet.  We  have  ah-eady  spoken  of  the 
Rock  newspaper.  That  newspaper  was  pubhshed 
at  an  office  which  had  distinguished  itself  in  the 
Low-Church  interest  by  other  pubhcations  as 
well.  It  was  here  that  that  pamphlet  was  pub- 
lished to  which  we  have  already  referred  inci- 
dentally— Tlie  Ritualistic  Conspiracy — which  in- 
volved a  libel  in  its  very  title,  and  at  least  one 
of  those  half-truths  which  are  the  worst  lies.  Now 
it  happened  that  a  Broad-Church  clergyman — 
the  Eev.  PhiHppe  Ahier,  who  had  been  a  pupil 
of  M.  de  Pressense,  and  was,  at  the  time  whereof 
we  now  speak.  Vicar  of  Glaisdale,  in  Yorkshire — 
had  said,  in  the  course  of  an  address  to  the  sup- 
porters of  his  parochial  church  reading-room  : — 

"  I  thank  all  those  who  have  sent  me  news- 
papers for  the  reading-room,  with  the  exception 
of  those  who  have  sent  me  the  Rock  and  the 
Police  News — two  of  the  most  sensational  papers 
pubhshed  :  one  with  its  pictures  of  horrors,  the 
other  with  its  from-time-to-time  graphic  descrip- 
tion of  the  evils  of  the  confessional,  both  largely 
drawn  from  the  imagination,  and  its  weekly 
budget  of  misstatements  about  clergymen  in  all 
parts  of  England.  I,  nevertheless,  give  it  credit 
of  a  desire  to  combat  the  debasing  evils  of  the 
confessional;  but,  to  my  mind,  the  publication 
of  the  evil  is  to  spread  it,  and  though  it  styles 
itself  a  family  Church  of  England  newspaper,  its 
entire    production    is    violently    inimical    to    the 


404  PROSECUTION    OF   THE    REV.    P.    AHIER. 

Church.  For  this  reason  I  do  not  think  that 
either  of  these  papers  is  fit  to  be  placed  in  the 
hands  of  young  men,  or  to  be  seen  in  any  private 
or  pubhc  society ;  at  all  events  not  in  the  Church 

Considering  a  certain  libel  against  the  Eoman 
Catholic  priesthood  in  Ireland  which  the  Rock 
had  once  published,  our  readers  may  perhaps 
think  that  Mr.  Ahier's  censure  of  that  paper  was 
not  undeserved ;  for  in  the  first  week  of  October 
1877  the  following  passage  had  appeared  in  the 
Rock  : — "  The  much-vaunted  superior  chastity  of 
Irish  girls  is  a  myth.  It  is  seeming,  not  real.  In 
the  rural  districts  of  Ireland  the  priest  is  the 
seducer  of  the  parish  ;  and  the  early  improvident 
marriages  of  the  young  people  are  encouraged  by 
him  to  conceal  his  immorality.  There  is  not  and 
cannot  be  chastity  where  Popery  reigns."  When, 
however.  Lord  Oranmore  and  Browne  had  written 
(as  his  Lordship  did  at  once,  his  letter  appearing 
in  the  next  issue  of  the  Rock)  to  disclaim  the 
casting  such  a  "  calumnious  and  untrue "  impu- 
tation on  the  Eoman  Catholic  priesthood  in  the 
sister  island,  the  Editor  admitted  that  while  he 
"  felt  bound "  to  insert  the  libel,  he  did  not  him- 
self believe  it !  thus  shutting  himself  up  to  the 
charge  of  having  "  felt  bound  "  to  insert  it  in  the 
Protestant  interest,  irrespectively  of  its  truth  or 

Therefore,  we  repeat,  our  readers  may  perhaps 
think  that  such  a  newspaper  was  really,  as  Mr. 
Ahier  had  said,  unfit  to  be  placed  in  the  hands  of 
young  men,  or  to  be  seen  in  any  private  or  public 

DAMAGES    GAINED    BY    THE    ROCK.  405 

society.  The  publishers,  however,  professed  them- 
selves aggrieved  by  what  had  thus  fallen  from  the 
Vicar  of  Glaisdale ;  and  so,  it  was  said,  did  the 
publishers  of  the  Police  News.  And  the  publishers 
of  the  Rock  took  proceedings  against  Mr,  Ahier 
for  £2,000  damages. 

The  case  came  before  Mr.  Justice  Field  and  a 
special  jury,  in  the  Queen's  Bench  Division.  In 
the  course  of  the  trial  the  plaintiffs'  counsel  tried 
to  make  it  appear  that  Mr.  Ahier  was  a  Eitualist, 
and  backed  up  by  the  Eitualist  party,  and  ap- 
parently for  the  sake  of  prejudicing  the  jury 
against  him  ;  the  fact  being  that  Mr.  Ahier  had 
never  been  a  member  of  that  party.  The  verdict 
went  against  him,  but  the  jury  would  not  give 
Messrs.  CoUingridge  more  than  £25  damages ;  and 
the  publishers  of  the  Police  News  deemed  it  best 
to  say  nothing  about  the  alleged  libel  against  their 
own  print.  Mr.  Ahier  afterwards  became  Incum- 
bent of  the  French  Episcopal  Church,  New  Oxford 
Street,  London. 



Immoral  Period,  continued.  Prosecution  of  Canon  Carter.  Bishop 
Ellicott  and  Mr.  Ward  of  St.  Raphael's,  Bristol.  Persecution  of 
the  Rev.  T.  Pelham  Dale. 

"  Now  hath  pride  and  rebuke  gotten  strength,  and  the  time  of 
destruction,  and  the  wrath  of  indignation." — 1  Maccabees  ii.  49. 

We  have  seen  liow  Mr.  Bulkeley's  information 
against  Canon  Carter  had  succeeded  in  the  year 
1877.*  We  do  not  know  whether  Mr.  Bulkeley 
had  anything  to  do  with  the  next  proceedings 
taken  against  the  Canon ;  but  be  that  as  it  may, 
on  the  11th  of  July,  1878,  a  physician  named 
Frederick  Guilder  Julius,  who  resided  mostly  in 
Egypt,  but  spent  a  small  part  of  every  year  at 
Clewer,  instructed  his  solicitor  to  transmit  to  the 
Bishop  of  Oxford  (Dr.  Mackarness)  a  letter  signed 
by  him  (Dr.  Julius),  and  charging  Mr.  Carter  with 
the  following  practices  : — Using  the  mixed  chalice ; 
facing  east  in  the  Prayer  of  Consecration  ;  bowing 
towards  and  over  the  Holy  Table  in  the  Prayer  of 
Consecration  ;  signing  the  cross  towards  the  people 
in  absolution,  in  ministering  the  Communion,  and 
in  the  final  benediction  ;  elevating  the  paten  and 
chalice,  "which  had  been  respectively  placed  on 
the  Holy  Table  in  an  unauthorised  manner  ;  "  using 
the  Eucharistic  lights  ;  and  singing  the  Agnus  Dei 
immediately  after  the  Prayer  of  Consecration.  In 
the  same  letter  Dr.  Julius  asked  the  Bishop  to  issue 
a  commission  of  inquiry  under  the  "  Act  for  the 
Better  Enforcing  Church  Discipline  ;  "  or,  in  case 
the  Bishop  should  think  proper,  to  send  the  case 

*  See  above,  p.  355. 

A    SPY.  407 

in  the  first  instance  by  Letters  of  Eequest  to  the 
Court  of  Appeal  for  the  province,  in  accordance 
with  the  thirteenth  section  of  the  said  Act :  that  is, 
we  suppose,  under  the  late  unhappy  circumstances 
of  the  Church,  the  Court  of  Lord  Penzance. 

The  Bishop  endeavoured  to  put  the  matter  off, 
Canon  Carter  being  esteemed  by  the  Catholic  party 
one  of  the  most  excellent  priests  in  the  Church. 
Nor  had  the  Bishop  given  any  definite  answer  by 
the  7tli  of  November,  on  which  day  Dr.  Julius  went 
abroad.  Meanwhile  a  person  named  E.  W.  Iltyd 
Peterson,  of  26a  Bury  Street,  St.  James's,  London, 
had  attended  St.  Andrew's,  Clewer,  on  three  several 
days,  apparently  in  the  capacity  of  a  spy,  and  on  the 
23rd  of  January,  1879,  an  afiidavit  by  him,  depos- 
ing to  the  truth  of  the  charges  made  against  Canon 
Carter  by  Dr.  Julius,  was  brought  into  the  Court  of 
Queen's  Bench  before  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  (Sir 
Alexander  Cockburn)  and  Mr.  Baron  Pollock,  in 
support  of  a  mandamus  compelling  the  Bishop  of 
Oxford  to  issue  a  commission  of  inquiry  with  respect 
to  the  said  charges,  under  the  Clergy  Discipline  Act. 
The  judgment  of  the  court  was  given  on  the  8tli  of 
March,  to  the  effect  that  the  applicant  was  entitled 
to  a  maiidamus  compelling  the  Bishop  either  to 
issue  a  commission  or  to  send  the  case  to  what  was 
termed  the  Court  of  Arches.  Against  this  judg- 
ment both  the  Bishop  and  Canon  Carter  appealed. 
Their  appeal  was  heard  before  the  Lord  Justices 
Bramwell,  Baggallay,  and  Thesiger,  and  judgment 
was  given  on  the  30th  of  May,  1879.  The  appeal 
w^as  allowed,  with  costs — that  is,  costs  as  if  there 
had  been  only  one  appellant. 


From  this  decision  of  the  Court  of  Appeal  Dr. 
Jiihus  appealed  to  the  House  of  Lords  ;  and  his 
appeal  was  heard  on  the  4th  of  March,  1880,  by 
the  Lord  Chancellor  (Earl  Cairns),  Lord  Penzance, 
Lord  Selborne,  and  Lord  Blackburn ;  who,  on  the 
22nd  of  the  same  month,  pronounced  in  favour  of 
the  Bishop,  and  gave  him  his  costs.  The  animus 
of  the  Government  was  shown  at  this  time  in  a  way 
which  did  not  commend  itself  to  the  good  opinion 
of  independent  observers.  Dr.  Stephens  said  in  the 
course  of  one  of  his  arguments  that  the  Bishop 
was  one  of  the  Queen's  judges.  Lord  Penzance 
was  one  of  the  Queen's  judges  beyond  all  question. 
But  while  the  Government  paid  the  expenses  of 
Lord  Penzance  in  appealing  against  the  Court  of 
Queen's  Bench,  they  would  not  pay  a  farthing  of 
what  had  been  incurred  by  the  Bishop  of  Oxford. 

The  final  decision  having  thus  been  given  for 
the  Bishop,  Canon  Carter  offered  to  resign,  from 
personal  consideration  for  his  Lordship.  Before 
the  Bishop  could  take  action  thereupon,  a  meeting 
of  parishioners  was  held,  at  which  a  resolution  was 
passed  deprecating  Canon  Carter's  resignation ;  but 
Canon  Carter  declined  to  withdraw  it,  and  thus  the 
Low-Church  party  gained  over  him  what  was  tanta- 
mount to  a  victory,  though  Dr.  Julius's  costs  had  to 
be  paid  by  the  "  Church  Association." 

Li  the  spring  of  1878  a  stain  was  brought  upon 
the  English  Episcopate  by  the  official  conduct  of 
the  Bishop  of  Gloucester  and  Bristol  (Dr.  EUicott) 
towards  the  Eev.  Arthur  Hawkins  Ward,  in  the 
interests  of  the  Low-Church  party  as  represented 
by  the  "  Church  Association."     The  institution  of 

REV.    A.    H.    WARD.  409 

St.  Eapliael's,  Bristol,  had  been  founded  in  or  about 
the  year  1858  by  the  Eev.  Eobert  Miles.*  It  con- 
sisted of  a  church  with  six  almshouses  attached, 
the  almshouses  being  meant  for  aged  seamen.  The 
church  was  opened,  on  a  licence  from  Bishop 
Baring,  on  the  2nd  of  May,  1859  :  was  largely 
attended  both  by  the  poor  of  the  neighbourhood 
and  by  a  large  number  of  people  from  Clifton, 
but  had  never  been  consecrated.  The  services  had 
been  noted  for  their  devotion  ;  and  Mr.  Ward,  who 
had  been  appointed  to  the  charge,  had,  it  seems, 
been  the  first  to  introduce  advanced  ritual  into  any 
church  in  Bristol.  He,  his  patron,  his  assistant, 
and  his  people  were  in  perfect  harmony.  The 
Bishop,  moreover,  had,  it  appears,  promised  not  to 
interfere  with  the  services  of  the  church  as  lonof 
as  they  were  conducted  in  conformity  with  certain 
resolutions  which  had  passed  in  Convocation. 

In  December  1877  Mr.  Ward  had  been  working 
for  nineteen  years  at  St.  Eapliael's,  on  an  endow- 
ment of  £63  per  annum,  made  up  to  £120  by  the 
founder  during  his  lifetime  ;  but  this  sum  he  paid 
to  an  assistant-clergyman,  subsisting  himself  on 
his  own  private  means. 

The  local  branch  of  the  "  Church  Association  " 
was,  it  may  be  conceived,  sorely  vexed  at  this  state 
of  things  ;  and  it  was  reported  that  it  had  tried  to 
get  up  a  prosecution  against  Mr.  Ward,  but  had 
failed,  no  third  person  having  been  found  to  pose 

*  These  and  other  particulars  are  chiefly  taken  from  a  pamphlet 
published  by  the  Church  Printing  Company,  and  entitled  St. 
Baphael's,  Bristol.  The  Church  closed  by  a  Bishoio.  Statetiient 
and  Correspondence. 


as  an  aggrieved  parishioner.     Unfortunately,  how- 
ever, Mr.  Ward  himself  furnished  an  occasion,  of 
which  both  the  Bishop  and  the  "  Church  Associa- 
tion "  were  only  too  glad  to  take  advantage.     In  a 
passage  from  Bishop  EUicott's  Historical  Lectures* 
cited   by  Canon    Cooke    in   the    appendix   to  his 
Power  of  the  Priesthood  in  Absolution,  the  Bishop 
had  said  :    "  The  mysterious  power  of  binding  and 
loosing    had  reference  not  merely  to  the  general 
power  of  receiving  into  the  Church  or  the  contrary, 
but  to  .  .  .  disciplinary  power  over  members  of  it,  both 
in  respect  of  the  retaining  or  absolving  of  sins." 
In  his  charge,  however,  delivered  in  the  course  of 
this  year,  his  Lordship  had  said  :  "  In  the  ordination 
of  priests  no  supernatural  gift  is  given  differing, 
either  in  degree  or  kind,  from  that  possessed  by 
all  Christians."     And  Mr.  Ward  had  in  a  speech 
drawn  public  attention  to  the  inconsistency  of  these 
two  pronouncements.     Thereupon  the  Bishop  wrote 
to  the  "  Church  Association  "  to  the  effect  that  he 
saw  a  way  in  which  the  Eitualistic  practices  at  St. 
Eaphael's  could  be  stopped,   and  requesting   the 
officers  of  the  "  Church  Association  "  to  get  up  a 
complaint.    Forthwith  Mr.  Inskip,  president  of  the 
local  branch,  attended  a  service  at  St.  Eaphael's, 
took  notes  of  what  he  witnessed  there,  and  got  to- 
gether three  inhabitants  of  Bedminster,  the  parish 
in  which  St.   Eaphael's  was    situated,  to  pose  as 
aggrieved    parishioners,    and    make    a    complaint 
against  Mr.  Ward.     On   the  receipt  of  this  com- 
plaint the  Bishop  wrote  to  Mr.  Ward,  December  8, 

*  Page  403. 

BISHOP    ELLICOTT    AND    MR.    WARD.  411 

1877,  requesting  him  to  desist  from  tlie  following- 
practices  : — 

The  use  of  vestments. 

The  use  of  lighted  candles  at  the  Holy  Com- 
munion, unless  when  needed  to  give  light. 

The  ceremonial  mixing  of  water  with  the  wine, 
and  the  administration  of  it,  when  so  mixed,  at  the 
Holy  Communion. 

The  use  of  incense  in  or  before  Divine  Service, 
or  during  the  Holy  Communion,  so  as  to  be  in  any 
way  subsidiary  thereto. 

The  Bishop  requested  Mr.  Ward,  further,  not  to 
kneel  during  the^  Prayer  of  Consecration,  not  to 
elevate  the  elements,  not  to  make  the  sign  of  the 
cross  when  reading  the  Absolution  in  the  Com- 
munion Service,  before  giving  the  elements,  or 
when  pronouncing  the  Benediction  ;  and  to  remove 
the  pictures  on  the  walls  of  the  chapel  representing 
the  Stations  of  the  Cross,  and  the  crucifix  as  well, 
unless  forming  part  of  an  architectural  decora- 
tion. These  paintings,  it  should  be  observed,  had 
been  presented  to  the  church  in  handsome  frames 
by  a  working  milkman,  and  had  cost  three  or  four 
pounds  apiece. 

Hereupon  ensued  a  correspondence ;  in  the 
course  of  which  the  Bishop,  without  disclosing  the 
names  of  the  complainants,  threatened  "  to  take  " 
(as  he  said)  "ulterior  proceedings"  in  case  Mr.  "Ward 
let  the  next  Sunday  (which  was  the  16th  of  De- 
cember) pass  without  complying  with  his  Lord- 
ship's directions  ;  and  Mr.  Ward,  addressing  himself 
to  the  matter  of  vestments  alone,  gave  the  Bishop 
his  reasons  for  not  complying.     In  a  conversation 

412  BISHOP    ELLICOTT   AND    MR.    WARD. 

with  the  Archdeacon  of  Bristol  (the  Yen.  Henry 
Goldney  Eandall),  whom  the  Bishop  had  requested 
to  see  Mr.  Ward  on  the  subject  of  the  correspon- 
dence, it  was  stated  that  Mr.  Ward  had  no  right 
to  remove  the  pictures  or  the  crucifix,  those  things 
being  the  property  of  Mr.  Miles  the  founder ;  and 
that  on  all  other  points  he  would  obey  the  Bishop, 
except  in  the  use  of  vestments,  the  retention  of  at 
least  two  lights  on  the  altar,  and  the  mixed  chalice. 
On  the  3rd  of  January,  1878,  came  a  formal  moni- 
tion from  the  Bishop  bidding  Mr.  Ward  to  comply 
with  all  the  directions  given  in  his  letter  of  the 
8th  of  December  (which  were  specified  at  length), 
except  only  that  concerning  the  signing  of  the  cross  ; 
and  requiring  Mr.  Ward  to  notify  in  writing  within 
a  month  that  he  had  done  so ;  informing  him, 
moreover,  that  if  he  failed  to  do  as  bidden  his 
licence  would  be  withdrawn. 

Mr.  Ward  replied  on  the  30th  of  January,  to  the 
effect  that  the  pictures  and  crucifix  had  been  re- 
moved, and  that  he  had  complied  with  the  Bishop's 
other  directions  by  desisting  on  and  since  the  pre- 
vious Sunday  from  celebrating  the  Holy  Eucharist 
at  all.  The  Bishop,  however,  was  determined  to 
drive  Mr.  Ward  into  a  corner,  and  therefore  wrote 
again,  charging  him  not  to  withhold  the  Holy 
Communion  from  the  worshippers  at  St.  Eaphael's  : 
whereupon  Mr.  Ward  resumed  the  celebration  ac- 
cording to  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer — that  is  to 
say,  with  the  Eucharistic  vestments,  the  two  altar- 
lights,  and  the  mixed  chalice. 

The  patron  of  the  institution  remonstrated  with 
the  Bishop,  reminding  him  of  his  promise  not  to 


interfere  with  the  services  of  the  church.  The 
Bishop,  however,  rephed  that  it  was  quite  true  he 
did  say  something  of  the  kind,  but  he  had  seen 
reason  to  aher  his  opinion  since  the  law  had  been 
proclaimed  on  the  subject  by  the  Eidsdale  Judg- 
ment.* And  on  March  22,  1878,  the  Bishop 
inhibited  Mr.  Ward  from  officiating  either  in  St. 
Eaphael's  Church  or  in  the  almshouses  belonging 
to  it ;  which  inhibition  was  duly  served  on  the 

Thus  a  church  in  which  for  nearly  twenty  years 
there  had  been  two  celebrations  of  the  Holy  Eu- 
charist every  Sunday,  and  one  celebration  every 
week  besides,  was  altogether  closed  ;  a  congrega- 
tion, including  three  hundred  regular  communi- 
cants, scattered;  and  two  earnest  priests  sent 
adrift;  and  all  this  for  no  pretended  cause  save 
that  the  priest  in  chief  responsibility  insisted  on 
keeping  his  promise  of  conformity  to  the  Prayer- 
book,  irrespectively  of  Privy-Council  lies. 

We  must  now  turn  our  eyes  again  to  the  metro- 
polis. The  Eev.  Thomas  Pelham  Dale  had  been, 
ever  since  the  23rd  of  April,  1847,  Eector  of  the 
united  parishes  of  St.  Vedast,  Foster  Lane,  and 
St.  Michael-le-Querne,  in  the  City  :  and  had  laid 
himself  open  to  the  special  malice  of  the  "  Church 
Association"  by  inviting  the  congregation  of  St. 
Alban's,  Holborn,  to  his  church,  for  the  six  weeks 
during  which  their  clergyman,  the  Eev.  Alexander 
Heriot  Mackonochie,  had  been  under  Sir  Eobert 
Phillimore's  suspension.     A  suit  was  therefore  un- 

*  Speech  by  Dr.  F.  G.  Swayne,  at  a  meeting  of  friends  and 
sympathisers  of  Mr.  Ward,  January  21,  1878. 

414  PROSECUTION    OF    THE    REV.    T.    P.    DALE. 

dertaken,  under   the  Public  Worship   Eegulation 
Act,  in  the  names  of  John   CUfFord  Sergeant,  of 
Gutter  Lane,  bootmaker;  Eobert  George  Morley, 
of  Carey  Lane,  warehouseman,  and  said  to  be  a 
Dissenter;  J.  Horwood,  of  Paternoster  Eow,  auc- 
tioneer, and  who  did  not  receive  Holy  Communion 
at  St.  Vedast's  ;  and  a  trunkmaker  named  Bengough; 
the  two  former  of  whom  were  churchwardens  of 
St.  Vedast,  and  the  two  latter  churchwardens  of 
St.  Michael-le-Querne.     Sergeant,  it  should  be  re- 
marked, had   been  formally  presented   to  Bishop 
Claughton,  the  Archdeacon,  for  absenting  himself 
from  Communion  for  more  than  twenty  years  :  he 
had,  in  fact,  never  been  known  to  communicate 
for  fully  thirty-two  years.     No  one  of  the  nominal 
complainants  had  attended  the  church  before  the 
advanced   ritual   was    introduced   in    1873  ;    and 
when   the   ritual   was    altered   by   the    intruding 
priest,  Mr.  Acland,  in  accordance  with  their  wishes, 
they  did  not  attend  the  church  even  then.     The 
"  Church   Association,"   however,   were    the    real 
prosecutors.     It  should  be  observed,  too,  that  Mr. 
Dale,  at  the   commencement  of  his  incumbency, 
had  had  no  congregation  at  all.     When,  however, 
the  Eev.  B.  Morgan  Cowie,  Vicar  of  St.  Lawrence's, 
Jewry,  had  been  promoted  to  the  Deanery  of  Man- 
chester, and  on  the  accession  to  St.  Lawrence's  of 
an  incumbent  of  different  religious  views,  the  choir 
of  St.  Lawrence's  and  the  greater  part  of  the  con- 
gregation  ceased  to  attend  that  church  ;   where- 
upon Mr.  Dale  let  them  know  that  he  would  be 
olad  to  welcome  the  choir  at  his  church  ;  and  to 
St.  Vedast's  accordingly  they  attached  themselves. 


About  tlie  same  time  Mr.  Dale  commenced  various 
ritual  improvements.  This  was  in  1873.  The 
charges  now  brought  against  him  were  these : — 
Use  of  the  Eucharistic  Hghts  ;  wearing  "unlawful" 
vestments — alb,  maniple,  chasuble,  stole,  biretta  ; 
facing  east  when  consecrating  the  elements  ;  bow- 
ing at  the  time  of  consecration  ;  use  of  wafer- 
bread  ;  use  of  the  mixed  chalice ;  elevating  the 
paten  and  chalice ;  signing  the  cross  towards  the 
congregation ;  having  the  great  bell  of  the  church 
tolled  during  the  Consecration-prayer ;  elevating 
the  alms  above  his  head ;  and  singing  the  Agnus 
Dei.  The  result  was  that  Mr.  Dale  was  inhibited 
and  suspended  by  Lord  Penzance  for  three  months, 
and  thereafter  until  he  should  conform  to  what 
the  noble  lord  called  law.  The  Bishop  of  London 
himself  undertook  at  first  the  Sunday  duty  at 
St.  Vedast's,  and  Mr.  Dale  did  not  oppose  his 
doing  it. 

An  appeal,  however,  was  made  to  the  Court  of 
Queen's  Bench ;  which,  in  July  1877,  declared  Lord 
Penzance's  sentence  to  be  nuU  and  void,  the  Bishop 
of  London  having  acted  contrarily  to  the  statute 
in  the  initiatory  proceedings,  by  sending  the  repre- 
sentation to  the  judge.  Mr.  Dale  thereupon  re- 
sumed the  exercise  of  his  rights.  Afterwards  a 
second  suit  was  instituted  by  the  same  parties  Mdio 
had  promoted  the  former  one  ;  but  this  also  failed, 
from  want  of  time  to  obtain  a  bishop  to  act  under 
section  16,  in  lieu  of  the  arclil)ishop  of  the  pro- 
vince and  the  bishop  of  the  diocese,  who  were  the 
alternate  patrons  of  Mr.  Dale's  benefice.  Then 
followed  a  third  suit,  on  a  complaint  made  by  the 


cliurcliwardens  on  the  12tli  of  July,  1878.  In 
this  latter  suit  the  Bishop  of  Exeter  (Dr.  Temple) 
was  appointed  by  the  Queen  to  act  in  all  matters 
arising  out  of  the  representation.  Lord  Penzance 
held  a  court  on  the  lOth  of  January,  1879,  in 
Committee  Eoom  D  of  the  House  of  Lords.  The 
promoters  asked  hereat  for  a  monition  against 
Mr.  Dale.  Lord  Penzance  reserved  his  judgment 
for  the  present,  but  on  the  8tli  of  February  ordered 
a  monition  to  be  issued  enjoining  Mr.  Dale  to 
discontinue  the  practices  whereof  complaint  had 
been  made  ;  he  also  inhibited  him  from  officiating, 
and  condemned  him  in  costs.  This  monition  was 
issued  on  the  21st.  On  the  19th  of  the  foUowincf 
March  an  inhibition  was  issued  in  consequence  of 
Mr.  Dale's  disregard  of  the  monition  ;  and  this  also 
Mr.  Dale  disregarded.  On  the  12th  of  December 
Lord  Penzance,  sitting  in  one  of  the  dressing-rooms 
of  the  House  of  Lords,  in  his  ordinary  clothes, 
pronounced  Mr.  Dale  contumacious  and  in  con- 
tempt for  his  non-payment  of  costs,  which  costs 
amounted  to  £169  7s.  2d.  Some  items  in  the  bill 
were  stated  by  Mr.  Dale,  in  a  letter  to  the  Church 
Times,  to  be  of  the  same  character  as  a  more 
famous  (or  infamous)  bill  of  costs  of  which  we 
shall  hereafter  make  due  mention.  On  the  13th 
of  March,  1880,  Lord  Penzance  granted  an  inhibi- 
tion against  Mr.  Dale,  and  ordered  Mr.  Dale  to  pay 
the  costs.     On  Palm  Sunday  (the  21st  of  March) 

the   Eev.  Acland    appeared   at   St.   Vedast's, 

having  been  sent  by  the  Bishop  to  do  Mr.  Dale's 
duty.  Mr.  Dale,  however,  insisted  on  doing  it 
himself,  and  Mr.  Acland  thereupon  retired.     And 

ST.  John's,  miles  platting.  417 

here  we  must  leave  Mr.  Dale  for  the  present,  to  see 
what  the  "  Church  Association  "  had  been  doino-  in 
the  case  of  two  other  Eitualistic  clergymen,  Messrs. 
Green  and  Enraght. 


Immoral  Period,  contmuecl.  Persecution  of  the  Eev.  S.  F.  Green. 
Prayer-book  Eevision  Society  and  Bill.  The  Deans'  Memorial 
in  favour  of  Toleration.  Coimter-memorials.  Bills  for  amending 
the  Clergy  Discipline  Act  and  Piiblic  Worshiij  Regulation  Act. 
Eelease  of  Mr.  Green. 

"  Faciimt  hi  plura  ;  sed  illos 
Defendit  numerus,  junct^que  umbone  phalanges." 

Juvenal,  Sat.  ii.  45,  46. 
"  These  perform  more  work ;  but  those  are  defended  by  number, 
Standing  close  and  thick,  with  shields  compacted  together." 

Miles  Platting  is  a  suburb  of  Manchester.  The 
parish  of  St.  John  the  Evangelist  contained  in 
1877  about  4,851  souls  :  and  here  the  Eev.  Sidney 
Faithhorn  Green  had  been  labouring  for  about 
ten  years,  having  been  instituted  in  1869  on  the 
nomination  of  Sir  T.  Perceval  Heywood,  Bart. 
The  income  of  the  living  was  £250  a  year  ;  there 
was  also  a  parsonage-house,  which  Mr.  Green's 
former  parishioners  had  enabled  him  to  furnish  to 
a  great  extent  with  gifts  from  themselves — tokens 
of  their  regard  for  him.  He  had  been  Curate  of 
Swindon,  in  Wiltshire. 

Of  course  a  pronounced  Churchman  could  not 
be  let  alone  by  the  Low-Churchmen  of  Manchester  • 
and  thus  in  1878  a  memorial  to  the  Bishop  (Dr. 

"•  28 


Fraser)  was  got  up  against  Mr.  Green,  the  cha- 
racter of  which  memorial  occasioned  the  Bishop 
to  acknowledi^e  it  in  these  terms  : — "Manchester, 
May  20th,  1878. — Sir, — I  beg  to  acknowledge 
the  receipt  of  a  petition  signed  (you  inform  me) 
by  320  parishioners  of  St.  John  the  Evangelist, 
Miles  Platting,  in  which  the  petitioners  pubhcly 
testify  to  the  propagation  of  false  doctrine  and 
deadly  error  by  the  Eev.  S.  F.  Green,  and  call 
upon  me  to  use  the  power  committed  to  me  to 
eradicate  this  abominable  idolatry.  I  respectfully 
submit  to  the  parishioners  that  as  no  particulars 
of  the  '  idolatry  or  false  doctrine  or  deadly  error ' 
alleged  are  given,  I  can  take  no  steps  either  by 
way  of  remonstrance  or  otherwise  against  the 
inculpated  clergyman.  I  have  not  counted  the 
signatures  to  the  petition,  but  I  observe  on  ex- 
amination of  it  that  whole  families  of  five,  six,  and 
seven  persons  have  signed  it  at  once,  and  that 
whole  groups  of  signatures  are  evidently  in  one 
handwriting,  and  are  not  therefore  the  signatures 
of  the  persons  whose  names  they  profess  to  give. 
This  fact  very  much  weakens  the  value  of  the 
petition  in  my  eyes. — I  remain,  your  obedient 
servant,  J.  Manchester." 

The  next  attempt  at  coercing  Mr.  Green  was 
only  too  successful.  A  prosecution  was  instituted 
by  the  "  Church  Association,"  the  nominal  parties 
to  it  being  three  persons  who  claimed  to  be 
parishioners,  but  not  one  of  whom  appears  to 
have  ever  attended  the  church  save  for  purposes 
connected  with  the  prosecution.  They  were, 
William  Dean,  an  ironworker ;    William  Warrell, 

prosecutors'  blunders.  419 

a  packer  ;  and  John  Hugh  Worrill,  a  warehouse- 
man. One  of  them,  moreover,  was  stated*  to  have 
been  previously  sentenced  to  six  months'  hard 
labour  for  embezzling  his  employer's  money.  One 
had  been  imported  into  the  parisli  for  the  ends 
of  the  persecuting  Association :  and  when  it  was 
found  that  either  he,  or  another,  had  not  resided 
long  enough  to  qualify  him,  some  alteration  had  to 
be  made  in  the  terms  of  the  representation  after 
the  legal  proceedings  had  commenced  ;f  for  which 
blunder  on  the  part  of  the  prosecution  Mr.  Green 
was  in  due  course  called  upon  to  pay — as  we  shall 
see  hereafter.  On  the  other  hand,  Mr.  Green  and 
his  congregation  were  thoroughly  at  one  :  so  that 
here  was  a  beautiful  instance  of  public  spirit  com- 
ing forward  in  the  interests  of  Protestantism,  to 
compel  a  company  of  Catholics  either  to  worship 
in  Protestant  fashion,  or  not  to  worship  in  the 
Church  of  England  at  all.  Of  the  purity  and  dis- 
interestedness of  this  public  spirit  more  will  have 
to  be  said  anon. 

The  charges  brought  against  Mr.  Green  were 
those  of  wearing  the  Eucharistic  vestments,  the 
use  of  the  altar-lights  in  the  celebration  of  the 
Eucharist,  and  the  use  of  the  mixed  chalice. 

It  should  be  mentioned  that  either  in  the  year 
before  or  (more  probably)  in  this  year  (1878)  the 
"  Church  Association  "  had  sent  a  lecturer  to  the 
parish  for  the  purpose,  apparently,  of  stirring  up 
opposition  to  Mi\  Green.     This  worthy,  although 

*  By  the  Hon.  Colin  Lindsay  Wood,  President  of  the  English 
Church  Union,  in  a  letter  to  the  Standard,  March  28, 1882. 

t  Stated  by  Earl  Beauchamp  in  the  House  of  Lords,  August  10, 



a  clergyman,  maintained  that,  according  to  the 
rubric  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  the  Abso- 
lution at  Mattins  and  Evensong  ought  to  be  said 
by  the  people,  the  priest  alone  standing ! 

The  representation  made  to  the  Bishop  by  the 
three  aggrieved  ones  was  made  in  November  1878. 
Nothing  more,  however,  was  done  for  two  months, 
because  the  "  Church  Association  "  hesitated  about 
providing  security  for  costs.     Eventuall}^,  however, 
the  Bishop  sent  the  case  to  Lord  Penzance,  and  it 
was  heard  in  due  course,  and  judgment  given  by 
Lord  Penzance  on  the  10th  of  June,  1879.     The 
defendant  had  not  appeared  either  in  person  or  by 
counsel ;  and  there  was  therefore  before  the  court 
nothing  at  all  save  the  case  for  the  prosecution, 
and  the  evidence  adduced  in  support  of  it.     In 
ordinary  criminal  cases  the  Judge  usually  deems 
it  his  duty  to  take,  to  a  certain  extent,  the  part  of 
an  advocate  in  behalf  of  a  prisoner  who  is  unde- 
fended ;  but  Lord  Penzance  on  this  occasion  went 
out  of  his  way  to   characterise   the   evidence    as 
"  unquestioned  and  unquestionable."     Mr.  Green 
afterwards  declared,  in  a  letter  to  the  Manchester 
Guardian,  that  on  three  important  points  the  evi- 
dence was   absolutely  untrue.     By  the  judgment 
now  pronounced,  he  was  admonished  to  discontinue 
the  practices  whereof  complaint  had  been  made. 
This  admonition  he,  as  a  faithful  minister  of  the 
Church  of  England,  disregarded.     On  the  9th  of 
August,  on  an   application  made  on  the  part   of 
the  promoters.  Lord  Penzance  directed  the  issue 
of  an  order  inhibiting  him,  in  terms  of  the  Pub- 
lic Worship  Eegulation  Act,  from  performing   any 

A   BILL   OF   COSTS.  421 

service  of  the  churcli,  or  otherwise  officiating  as 
a  clergyman  for  the  space  of  three  months ;  and 
condemned  him  in  costs.  This  inhibition  also 
Mr.  Green  disregarded,  because  Lord  Penzance 
derived  his  commission  solely  from  Parliament, 
and  had  thus  no  authority  to  inflict  spiritual 
penalties,  or  indeed  to  deal  with  spiritual  matters 
at  all. 

In  the  bill  of  costs  which  Mr.  Green  was  now 
called  upon  to  pay  were  several  items  which  throw 
some  lioiit,  over  and  above  what  the  reader  has 
already,  upon  the  characters  both  of  the  perse- 
cuting party  and  also  of  the  Judge.  As  originally 
prepared,  the  charges  against  Mr.  Green  were 
drawn  in  the  names  of  three  persons ;  but  one  of 
them  was  not  sufficiently  qualified  in  the  terms 
of  the  Public  Worship  Eegulation  Act ;  and  Mr. 
Green  was  charged  with  the  costs  of  rectifying 
this  mistake.  Aa;ain,  the  Diocesan  Ee^istrar  had 
transmitted  the  charges  at  too  early  a  date ;  and 
this  error  could  not  be  remedied  at  a  cost  of  less 
than  £9  Ids.  2d.  Moreover,  William  Dean,  the 
first  nominal  complainant,  had  undertaken  the 
prosecution  from  a  sense  of  Christian  duty,  and 
the  proceedings  against  his  rector  had  cost  him 
some  pain,  or  at  least  inconvenience,  and  other 
trouble.  For  this,  then,  it  was  right  that  he  should 
have  some  compensation  at  his  rector's  expense ; 
and  the  compensation  deemed  proper  was  10s. 
besides  travelling  expenses,  hotel-bills,  and  £2  10s. 
for  loss  of  time.  There  were  some  other  items 
as  well  in  the  bill  of  costs — items  which  did 
not    reflect    great    credit    upon    Lord   Penzance. 


The  prosecution  had  the  face  to  charge  Mr. 
Green  four  times  over  for  their  own  attendance 
tipon  the  noble  Lord  at  his  private  residence ; 
the  object  of  these  private  interviews  being  to 
(jet  his  Lordship's  private  instructions  for  the  con- 
duct of  their  case.  The  total  cost  of  these  items 
was  £3  85.  Sd* 

This  bill  of  costs  Mr.  Green  at  first  refused  to 

*  "  Extracts  from  bills  of  costs  from  Messrs.  Tebbs  and  Sons, 
Doctors'    Commons.  .  .  1878,  Feb.  3. — This  matter  having  been 
referred  by  the  provincial  registrars  for  the  decision  of  the  Judge, 
attending  Lord  Penzance   at  his  private  residence,  and  afterwards 
elsewhere,  when  we  were  unable  to  see  him,  but  made  an  appoint- 
ment for  later  in  the  day — 13s.  Ad.    Feb.  3. — Attending  his  Lordship 
again  in  the  evening  and  long  interview,  when  he  agreed  in  our 
construction  of  the  Act  and  rules,  and  was  prepared  to  authorise 
the  course  we   suggested ;  but  having  regard  to  the  present  diffi- 
culties of  procedure  under  the  Piiblic  Worship  Regulation  Act,  he 
advised  that  the  proceeding  should  be  commenced  de  novo — 11.  Is. 
Feb.  4. — Perusing  letter  from  Lord  Penzance  later  in  the  day,  that 
on    consideration   he    was  prepared   to  authorise    the    coiu'se   we 
desired,  and  would,  on  our  request  and  responsibiUty,  write  to  the 
Diocesan  Registrars  to  return  the  representation  to  us.     Feb.  4. — 
Attending  Lord  Penzance  at  his  residence,  as  we  deemed  it  im- 
portant it  should  not  be  sent  to  us,  but  returned  to  the  Diocesan 
Registrar,  when,  after  conference,  he  agreed  to  modify  his  directions 
to  his  registrars  accordingly — 13s.  Ad.      April  30. — Attending  Lord 
Penzance  at  his  residence,  stating  counsel's  view  and  advice,  when 
the  Judge,  though  considering  the  notice  good,  agreed  to  adopt  the 
course  we  required,  and  desired  us  again  to  confer  with  the  Arches' 
registrar  thereon — IZ.  Is."      With  these  extracts  may  be  compared 
the  following  extract  from  a  report  in  the   Times  of  February  20, 
1880,  of  a  trial  for  mm-der : — "  Mr.  Justice  Hawkins,  on  taking  his 
seat,  said  some  wicked  or  foolish  persons  had  thought  it  necessary 
to  write  to  him  on  the  subject  of  the  trial.     They  had  better  not 
let  him  know  who  they  were.     Anyone  who  wrote  to  a  judge  while 
a  case  was  proceeding,  on  matters  connected  with  it,  was  liable  to 
be  imprisoned  for  being  guilty  of  a  very  gross  contempt  of  court, 
which   ought   to   be  punished.     If  I  have  the  opportixnity  I  will 
punish  any  one  who  is  guilty  of  it  severely." 


Persecution,  however,  did  not  complete  the  tactics 
of  Mr.  Green's  adversaries.  On  the  evening  of  the 
7th  of  April,  1879,  some  persons  secreted  them- 
selves in  his  church  after  the  service  ;  and  as  soon 
as  the  place  was  quiet  they  pulled  down  the  orna- 
ments of  the  altar,  and  after  laying  trains  in  the 
vestry  to  the  several  presses,  lighted  in  the  vestry 
a  bonfire  ;  in  the  hope,  evidently,  that  the  presses 
might  be  ignited  and  the  church  burnt  down. 
Fortunately,  however,  the  heap  of  books,  which 
had  been  enlarged  by  the  addition  of  the  contents 
of  the  drawers,  burnt  out  without  communicating 
with  the  woodwork.* 

On  the  28th  of  February,  1880,  Lord  Penzance 
sat  in  his  private  room  at  the  House  of  Lords,  and 
settled  a  question  about  the  costs  in  Mr.  Green's 
case.  These  amounted  now  to  £249,  and  that 
amount  Lord  Penzance  ordered  him  to  pay.  On 
the  24tli  of  July  application  was  made  for  an  order 
declaring  Mr.  Green  to  be  in  contempt  of  court 
for  non-payment  of  costs ;  which,  after  taxation, 
amounted  to  £243  75.  Sd.  The  order  was  granted. 
On  the  28th  of  October  Lord  Penzance  sat  as^ain 
in  his  di'essing-room  at  the  House  of  Lords,  when, 
application  having  apparently  been  made  that  Mr. 
Green  might  be  signified  in  contempt,  he  decided  to 
adjourn  the  case,  on  the  ground  that  it  would  be 
well  to  see  whether  any  effect  would  be  produced 
upon  Mr.  Green  by  the  issuing  of  a  writ  of  signiji- 
cavit  against  Mr.  Dale.  Meanwhile,  however,  the 
time  expired  during  which  the  signiUcavit  could 
legally  be  acted  upon. 

*  Church  Times,  April  10,  1879. 

424  ARREST    OF   MR.    GREEN. 

On  the  7th  of  March  apphcation  was  made  to 
Mr.  Bristowe,  Q.C.,  sittmg  as  Yice-Chancellor  of 
the  Palatine  Court  of  Lancaster,  for  a  writ  of  at- 
tachment against  Mr.  Green,  on  the  ground  of  his 
disobedience  to  Lord  Penzance's  inhibition.  A 
writ  of  attachment  was  in  consequence  issued, 
returnable  to  the  Justices  of  Assize  at  Lancaster.* 
Subsequently,  as  it  seems,  Mr.  Green's  contempt  of 
court  was  signified  to  the  Court  of  Chancery,  under 
a  statute  of  King  George  III. ;  f  and  Mr.  Green  was 
thereupon  arrested  on  the  19th  of  March,  and  im- 
prisoned in  Lancaster  Castle  ;  and  lodged,  curiously 
enough,  by  authority  of  the  Quaker  Chancellor 
of  the  Duchy  of  Lancaster  (the  Eight  Hon.  John 
Brioiit)  in  the  same  cell  which  had  once  been 
occupied  by  the  Quaker  George  Pox.  It  was  un- 
derstood that  his  imjDrisonment  would  last  until 
he  should  purge  himself  of  contempt  by  expressing 
a  willingness  to  obey  the  ruling  of  Lord  Penzance's 
court.  This,  together  with  the  conduct  shown 
about  the  same  time  by  a  disloyal  Irish  sheriff, 
and  its  results,  gave  occasion  for  the  following 
epigram : — 

A  Sheriff  named  Gray  and  a  Parson  named  Green 
"Were  put  into  gaol  for  contemning  the  Queen. 
The  Queen  was  dehghted  to  set  Gray  away, 
"While  Green  in  his  Lancaster  prison  must  stay 
Until  he  tiu-n  traitor,  or  till  he  turns  gray. 

It  was  about  the  same  time  that  Messrs.  Tebbs, 
the  agents  of  the  "  Church  Association,"  having 
had  instructions  to  distrain  upon  the  goods  of  Mr. 

*  Church  Times  for  March  11,  1881. 
t  53  Geo.  III.  cap.  127. 

BAILIFFS    IN    HIS    HOUSE.  425 

Green  for  costs,  two  sheriff's  officers  were  put  in 
possession  of  St.  John's  rectory-house  ;  and  there 
these  men  remained,  not  selling  the  furniture 
(which,  it  was  alleged,  they  had  no  legal  authority 
to  sell),  but  subjecting  Mrs.  Green  and  her  family 
to  intolerable  annoyance.  Mrs.  Green  had  gone  on 
her  husband's  arrest  into  a  neighbouring  cottage, 
and  on  one  occasion  she  applied  to  one  of  the 
bailiffs  at  the  rectory  for  a  change  of  clothes  for 
her  baby,  which  had  been  ill.  The  bailiff  said  that 
he  would  apply  to  a  higher  authority,  and  answer 
was  returned  that  she  could  not  be  permitted  to 
remove  the  smallest  article  from  the  premises. 

On  the  30th  of  March  application  was  made  in 
the  House  of  Lords  before  the  Lord  Chancellor  for 
an  order  authorising  the  sale  of  Mr.  Green's  effects. 
The  question  was  adjourned  5me  die  ;  it  came  again 
before  the  Lord  Chancellor  on  the  2nd  of  April, 
and  was  adjourned  again.  The  Lord  Chancellor, 
however,  suggested  that  the  parties  should  come 
to  an  arrangement  with  a  view  to  the  departure  of 
the  bailiffs ;  and  this  was  acted  upon,  so  that  Mrs. 
Green  and  her  family  were  able  to  return  to  the" 
rectory  on  the  6th  of  April,  just  six  weeks  after 
the  bailiffs  had  been  put  in.  The  same  day  Messrs. 
Justices  Grove  and  Lindley,  sitting  in  the  Queen's 
Bench  Division,  refused  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus  on 
Mr.  Green's  behalf,  and  condemned  him  in  costs. 

On  the  7th  of  May  application  was  again  made 
to  the  Lord  Chancellor  in  the  House  of  Lords  for 
an  order  to  remove  and  sell  Mr.  Green's  goods. 
Li  the  course  of  the  proceedings  the  Lord  Chan- 
cellor asked  why  the  costs  were  so  large,  the  case 


being  undefended.  He  would  have  thought  that 
five  or  ten  pounds  ought  to  have  been  the  out- 
side charge.  His  Lordship  reserved  judgment,  but 
shortly  afterwards  announced  that  he  felt  compelled 
against  his  will  to  order  a  sale  at  the  rectory.* 

At  the  end  of  June  it  was  stated  in  various 
London  newspapers  that  the  "  Church  Association  " 
were  resisting  an  application  for  the  early  hear- 
ing of  Mr.  Green's  appeal  to  the  House  of  Lords. 
Captain  Palmer,  the  secretary  of  the  Association, 
denied  this  ;  but  it  was  repeated  in  the  following 
week  by  Messrs.  Brooks,  Jenkins,  and  Co.f  On  the 
2ord  of  July  the  bailiffs  resumed  possession  of  the 
rectory;  and  shortly  afterwards  Mrs.  Green,  not 
long  after  a  confinement,  was  so  frightened  by  one 
of  these  rufiians,  whose  temper  was  at  the  time 
the  worse  for  liquor,  that  her  health  was  seriously 
affected,  and  she  did  not  recover  for  some  months. 

Mr.  Green's  appeal  to  the  House  of  Lords  was 
heard  by  the  Lord  Chancellor  (the  Earl  of  Selborne) 
and  Lords  Blackburn  and  Watson.  The  arguments 
occupied  two  days,  and  judgment  was  given  on 
the  2nd  of  August,  affirming  the  judgment  of  the 
courts  below,  and  dismissing  the  appeal ;  without, 
however,  condemning  Mr.  Green  in  costs. 

The  sale  of  Mr.  Green's  goods  occupied  two 
days,  and  ended  on  Friday,  August  5th.  The 
amount  for  which  the  distraint  had  originally 
been  ordered  was  £242,  but  subsequent  expenses 
had  increased  it  to  £450.  The  library  contained 
about  a  thousand  volumes  ;  tlie  furniture  consisted 

*  Church  Times,  May  27,  1881. 
t  Ih.  July  9,  1881. 


mostly  of  presents  from  friends  and  former  parish- 
ioners. The  proceeds  of  the  sale  amounted  to 
£298.  The  Record,  in  a  leading  article,  expressed 
disapproval  of  the  action  of  the  "  Church  Associa- 
tion "  in  ordering  the  sale,  and  therein  it  did  but 
express  the  opinion  of  more  than  one  Low-Church- 
man. The  writer  of  the  article  referred,  curiously 
enough,  to  St.  Paul's  words,  "  Why  do  ye  not  rather 
take  wrong?  why  do  ye  not  rather  suffer  your- 
selves to  be  defrauded  ?  "  (just  imagine,  the  poor, 
persecuted  "  Church  Association "  suffering  for 
righteousness'  sake  and  in  the  cause  of  charity !), 
apparently  ignoring  the  ol^vious  applicability  of 
the  very  next  words  of  the  Apostle,  "  Yea,  ye  do 
wrong,  and  defraud,  and  that  your  brethren." 
But  in  fact,  as  one  of  their  friends  owned,  the 
"  Church  Association  "  wanted  the  money  ;  they  had 
spent  all,  or  almost  all,  of  the  £50,000  which  had 
been  subscribed  for  the  persecution ;  they  feared 
that  they  would  not  be  able  to  pay  the  salaries 
of  their  officials,  Messrs.  Concanon,  Ormiston, 
Potter,  and  Wainwright ;  and  these  considerations 
compelled  them  to  become  the  spoilers  of  Mr. 
Green's  worldly  goods.  They  were  in  the  position 
described  by  Tennyson's  Northern  Farmer  (New 
Style),  in  the  lines — 

"  Tis'n  them  as  'as  mnnny  as  breaks  into  'ouses  an'  steals, 
Them  as  'as  coats  to  their  backs  an'  taakes  their  regiilar  meals, 
Noa,  but  it's  thim  as  niver  knaws  wheer  a  meal's  to  be  'ad. 
Taake  my  word  for  it,  Sammy,  the  poor  in  a  loomp  is  bad." 

It  is  a  curious  example  of  the  degree  to  which 
party  spirit  will  blind  the  eyes  to  the  most  self- 
evident  truths,  that  a  member  of  the  council  of  the 


"  Cliurcli  Assocication,"  writing  to  the  Record  to 
vindicate  the  Association,  described  Mr.  Green's 
position  as  "  not  that  of  a  martyr,  but  that  of  a 
scheming  debtor,  who  first  injures  and  thenmahgns 
his  creditor,"  and  who  "  deserves  no  more  con- 
sideration than  any  other  malefactor  who  breaks 
his  contracts  and  resists  the  law." 

Meanwhile  the  Prayer-book  Eevision  Society  had 
not  been  idle.  And  in  1880  Lord  Ebury(who  had 
brought  the  subject  of  revision  before  the  House 
of  Lords  at  a  previous  time),  introduced  a  bill  into 
the  same  House  for  altering  or  omitting  the  third 
rubric  in  the  Order  for  Morning  and  Evening 
Prayer  ("  The  Absolution,  or  Eemission  of  Sins,' 
&c.),  the  last  clause  in  the  first  exhortation  to 
Communion  (that  about  the  benefit  of  absolution), 
the  nineteenth  rubric  in  the  Communion  Service 
(apparently  that  about  the  priest  or  bishop  pro- 
nouncing absolution),  the  Absolution  in  the  Visita- 
tion Service  and  its  rubric,  and  the  formula  of 
Ordination  and  Consecration  in  the  Ordinal.  On 
this  the  Church  Times  truly  remarked :  "If  the 
passages  in  question  do  not  sanction  the  '  system ' 
of  which  the  noble  Lord  complains,  it  seems  a  little 
absurd  to  meddle  with  them ;  if  they  do,  it  is  a 
great  deal  worse  than  absurd — it  is  a  false  and 
scandalous  libel — to  say  that  the  said  system  is 
'  alien  to  the  doctrine  and  practice  of  the  Church.'  "* 
In  the  following  year  (1881)  Lord  Ebury  resigned 
the  office  of  Chairman  in  the  Prayer-book  Eevision 
Society's  Council ;  and  was  succeeded  by  the  Hon. 
and  Eev.  E.  V.  Bligh.     This  gentleman  had  been 

*  CJmrch  Times,  March  12,  1880,  p.  163. 

THE  deans'  memorial.  429 

a  beneficed  clergyman  for  nearly  twenty  years,  but 
appears  to  have  resigned  the  vicarage  of  Birling,  in 
Kent,  in  1875. 

At  the  same  time  it  began  to  be  felt  more  and 
more  that  such  proceedings  as  those  in  the  case 
of  Mr.  Green  were  a  great  scandal  to  the  Church ; 
and  in  the  beginning  of  1881  the  following  memo- 
rial was  presented  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury. It  was  called  the  Deans'  Memorial,  from  its 
being  headed  with  the  signatures  of  the  Deans  of 
St.  Paul's,  Durham,  Manchester,  Worcester,  and 
York  :— 

"  To  his  Grace  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 

"  Your  Grace  has  been  pleased  to  invite  those  of 
the  clergy  who  feel  dissatisfied  or  alarmed  at  the 
present  circumstances  of  the  Church  to  state  what 
they  desire  in  the  way  of  remedy.  Encouraged  by 
this  invitation,  we  venture  to  submit  to  your  Grace 
the  foUowino^  suCTcrestions. 

"  First  of  all,  and  especially,  we  would  respectfully 
express  our  desire  for  a  distinctly  avowed  policy 
of  toleration  and  forbearance  on  the  part  of  our 
ecclesiastical  superiors  in  dealing  with  questions  of 
ritual.  Such  a  policy  appears  to  us  to  be  demanded 
alike  by  justice  and  by  the  best  interests  of  relio'ion. 
For  justice  would  seem  to  require  that  unless  a 
rigid  observance  of  the  rubrical  law  of  the  Church, 
or  of  recent  interpretations  of  it,  be  equally  exacted 
from  all  the  parties  within  her  pale,  it  should  no 
longer  be  exacted  from  one  party  alone,  and  under 
circumstances  which  often  increase  the  difficulty  of  ■, 

complying  with  the  demand.     And,  having  regard  * 


to  the  uncertainties  wliicli  have  been  widely  thought 
to  surround  some  recent  interpretations  of  eccle- 
siastical law,  as  well  as  to  the  equitable  claims  of 
congregations  placed  in  the  most  dissimilar  religious 
circumstances,  we  cannot  but  think  that  the  recog- 
nised toleration  of  even  wide  diversities  of  ceremonial 
is  alone  consistent  with  the  interests  of  true  relisfion 
and  with  the  well-being  of  the  English  Church  at 
the  present  time. 

"  The  immediate  need  of  our  Church  is,  in  our 
opinion,  a  tolerant  recognition  of  divergent  ritual 
practice ;  but  we  feel  bound  to  submit  to  your 
Grace  that  our  present  troubles  are  likely  to  recur 
unless  the  courts  by  which  ecclesiastical  causes  are 
decided  in  the  first  instance,  and  on  appeal,  can  be 
so  constructed  as  to  secure  the  conscientious  obe- 
dience of  clergymen  who  believe  the  constitution  of 
the  Church  of  Christ  to  be  of  Divine  appointment, 
and  who  protest  against  the  State's  encroachment 
upon  rights  assured  to  the  Church  of  England  by 
solemn  Acts  of  Parliament.  We  do  not  presume  to 
enter  into  details  upon  a  subject  confessedly  sur- 
rounded with  great  difficulties,  but  content  ourselves 
with  expressing  an  earnest  hope  that  it  may  receive 
the  attention  of  your  Grace  and  of  the  Bishops  of 
the  Church  of  England. 

"  We  are  your  Grace's  very  obedient  servants." 

This  received  4,264  signatures.  A  stronger 
memorial  was  got  up  by  Archdeacon  Denison,  and 
signed  by  744  persons.  On  the  other  hand,  a  Low- 
Church  memorial  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
was  got  up  in  favour  of  persecution,  and  signed  by 
three  bishops,  ten  deans,  ten  archdeacons,  five  heads 


of  colleges,  nineteen  canons,  ninety-six  prebendaries 
and  honorary  canons,  and  two  professors,  besides 
other  clergymen.  Another  memorial  to  the  same 
effect  was  got  up  on  the  part  of  the  laity.*  Like 
other  Low-Church  memorials,  it  was  not  confined 
to  communicants ;  and  it  was  signed  in  several 
instances  more  than  once  by  one  and  the  same 
person.     It  ran  thus  : — 

"  To  the  Most  Reverend  the  Lord  Archbishop  of 

"We,  the  undersigned,  lay  members  of  the 
Church  of  England,  beg  leave  hereby  most  respect- 
fully to  express  to  your  Grace  our  firm  attachment 
to  the  doctrines  and  ceremonial  established  in  the 
Church  of  England  at  the  Eeformation,  and  set 
forth  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  We  desire 
to  represent  to  your  Grace  that  whilst  we  are  most 
anxious  to  maintain  such  reasonable  latitude  of 
opinion  and  practice  as  is  not  inconsistent  with  the 
teaching  of  the  Formularies,  Articles,  and  Homilies 
of  the  Church  of  England,  taken  in  their  plain 
grammatical  sense,  or  with  a  faithful  adherence 
to  the  rubrics  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  as 
interpreted  by  the  custom  of  three  hundred  years, 
we,  nevertheless,  feel  ourselves  constrained  to  enter 
our  solemn  and  emphatic  protest  against  the  tole- 
ration within  the  Church  of  England  of  any  doc- 
trines or  practices  which  favour  the  restoration  of 
the  Eomish  Mass,  or  any  colourable  imitation  thereof, 
— any  re-introduction  of  the  Confessional — or  any 
assumption  of  sacerdotal  pretensions  on  the  part  of 

*  Church  Times,  January  26,  1883. 


tlie  clergy,  in  the  ministration  of  the  Word  and 
Sacraments."  * 

This   memorial   was  signed   by   no  more    than 
23,997  persons.f 

Meanwhile  an  agitation  was  got  up  for  the  par- 
ticular end  of  effecting  the  release  of  Mr.  Green. 
In  some  churches — a  thousand,  it  was  said — prayers 
were  publicly  asked  and  offered  for  him.  And 
although  he  was  sneered  at  in  some  of  the  public 
papers,  and  one  eminent  prelate  declared  that  his 
cell-door  was  "  locked  in  the  inside,"  and  Church- 
Association  listeners  upheld  his  imprisonment  as 
a  right  thing,  and  a  Vicar-General  (Sir  Edmund 
Beckett)  published  a  brutal  slander  on  Mrs.  Green, 
and  one  leading  Church-Associationist  said  to  a 
clergyman  of  the  Diocese  of  Manchester,  "We 
can't  let  Mr.  Green  out — ^just  look  what  a  lot  it  has 
cost  us  to  put  him  in  ;  "  J  yet  it  began  to  be  felt, 
even  by  those  who  knew  least  about  the  matter,  and 
whose  prejudices  were  against  the  sufferer,  that  Mr. 
Green's  continued  imprisonment  was  a  disgrace 
not  only  to  that  vile,  hypocritical  Association  which 
had  caused  it,  but  to  the  country  in  general,  and 
especially  to  the  "  Liberal "  Government  of  Mr. 
Gladstone.  The  "  Church  Association  "  lost  several 
members.  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  spoke 
of  imprisonment  as  a  thing  to  be  deprecated ; 
though  intimating  at  the  same  time  that  for  im- 
prisonment deprivation  would  be  a  fit  and  proper 
substitute;  this  involving  of  course,  in  all  cases 

*  standard,  March  10,  1881. 

t  Illustrated  London  News,  April  9,  1881. 

X  Church  Times,  December  2,  1881. 


where  the  victim  had  not  enough  private  income 
for  his  own  maintenance,  and  where  he  was  not 
supported  by  his  friends,  starvation  or  the  work- 
house. In  1882  a  bill  was  drafted  by  the  "  Church 
Association,"  and  brought  into  Parliament  by  the 
two  Archbishops,  the  operation  of  which  would 
have  been  to  effect  Mr.  Green's  release,  but  to  com- 
mute imprisonment  for  deprivation.  After  passing 
the  Lords,  it  was  moved  in  the  Commons  by  Mr.  J. 
Talbot,  and  supported  by  Mr.  Beresford  Hope,  Sir 
J.  McKenna,  and  Mr.  Hubbard  ;  but  opposed  by 
the  Attorney-General  (Sir  Henry  James)  and  Mr. 
Magniac,  and  finally  talked  out. 

In  moving  the  second  reading  on  the  9th  of  May, 
Mr.  Morgan  Lloyd  described  the  bill  as  intended  to 
amend  the  Church  Discipline  Act  and  the  Public 
Worship  Eegulation  Act,  and  to  make  them  more 
effectual.  It  proposed,  said  he,  to  give  the  judge 
power  to  deprive  a  clerk  of  his  benefice  for  contu- 
macy, and  so  to  avoid  the  scandal  of  keeping  a  man 
in  prison  for  an  offence  against  the  ecclesiastical 
laws.  Evidently  the  British  public  in  general  did 
not  care  very  much  for  any  wrongs  which  might 
be  done  to  a  Eitualistic  clergyman. 

Thus  Mr.  Green's  imprisonment  continued  until 
the  benefice  became  vacant — that  is,  in  so  far  as  an 
Act  of  Parliament  alone,  administered  by  a  judge 
with  parliamentary  authority  alone,  could  make  it 
vacant.  And  even  with  respect  to  the  tei  ms  of  the 
Act  itself,  it  was  matter  of  controversy  as  to  the 
exact  date  at  which  the  vacancy  was  to  be  deemed 
to  have  occurred.  Under  these  circumstances, 
suddenly,  without  consulting  anyone,  on  the  28tli 
n.  29 

434  MR.    GREEN   RESIGNS. 

of  October,  1882,  Mr.  Green  resigned  the  benefice  ; 
and  addressed  his  parishioners  in  a  letter  the  next 
day,  setting  forth  the  grounds  on  which  he  had 
decided  on  this  step  ;  and  which  were : — (1)  the 
object  of  saving,  if  possible,  the  appearance  of  his 
Diocesan  in  Lord  Penzance's  court,  he  having  been 
informed  that  the  Bishop  intended  to  appear  there 
on  the  4th  of  November  to  move  for  Mr.  Green's 
release.  (2)  The  object  of  saving  his  patron, 
Sir  Perceval  Heywood,  the  expense  of  a  litigation 
which  would  probably  be  decided  against  him  ;  for 
he  had  been  informed  that  the  Bishop  was  proceed- 
ing to  sequestrate  the  benefice,  on  the  assumption 
that  it  was  already  legally  vacant ;  the  legality  of 
which  sequestration  would,  Mr.  Green  anticipated, 
be  called  in  question  by  Sir  Perceval,  Sir  Perceval 
having  already  intimated,  in  a  speech  at  the  October 
Church  Congress,  his  intention  of  standing  by  Mr. 
Green.  (3)  A  third  ground  for  Mr.  Green's  resig- 
nation was  the  object  of  avoiding  such  a  painful 
leave-taking  of  his  parish  as  he  anticipated  would 
have  to  be  in  a  very  few  weeks. 

But  however  the  Bishop's  action  might  be  de- 
precated by  Mr.  Green,  his  Lordship  did  apply  to 
Lord  Penzance,  as  he  had  intended,  for  Mr.  Green's 
release.  The  "  Church  Association,"  indeed,  was 
the  only  party  which  could  legally  make  such  an 
application ;  and,  with  the  malice  which  had  cha- 
racterised their  proceedings  from  the  first,  they  had 
abstained  from  making  it.  But  they  felt  that  it  was 
of  no  use  to  press  their  game  further  ;  the  obloquy 
which  they  had  incurred  was  quite  enough  for 
them ;  and  they  now  left  the  matter  in  the  hands 

NEW   SUIT   AGAINST   MR.   BAGHOT   DE   LA   BERE.      435 

of  Lord  Penzance  ;  who  thereupon  ruled  that  Mr. 
Green  had  expiated  his  contempt,  and  had  by  means 
of  his  imprisonment  obeyed  the  monitions  of  the 
court !  The  next  thing  in  course  was  to  order  a 
writ  of  dehverance.  The  writ  was  brouo-ht  the 
same  evening  (November  4)  to  Lancaster  Castle, 
where  Mr.  Green  had  already  been  informed  by 
telegram  of  the  issue  of  the  proceedings ;  and  on 
receiving  the  official  communication  he  proceeded 
to  avail  himself  of  it,  and  was  ere  long  in  the  bosom 
of  his  family. 


Immoral  Period,  continued.   Continued  Persecution  of  Mr.  Edwards 
(Baghot  de  la  Bere)  and  Mr.  Dale. 

On  the  9th  of  March,  1880,  a  second  suit  was 
commenced  against  Mr.  Edw^ards,  wdio  about  this 
time  took  the  name  of  Baghot  de  la  Bere,  and  it 
was  avow^edly  commenced  for  securing  his  depri- 
vation. Information  of  the  Bishop's  having  signed 
Letters  of  Eequest  to  Lord  Penzance  in  this  second 
suit  was  first  received  by  the  Vicar  of  Prestbury 
in  the  perusal  of  a  paragraph  in  the  Rock  news- 
paper of  Friday,  the  12th  of  March.  On  his  in- 
quiring of  the  Bishop  whether  this  was  true,  he 
was  told  by  his  right  rev.  Father  in  God  that  his 
Lordship  was  precluded  from  communicating  with 
him  in  reference  to  the  case  Combe  v.  Edwards. 
In  order  to  understand  this,  the  reader  must  be 
informed  that  in  an  episcopal  charge,  delivered 
some  time  before,  the  Bishop  had  announced  the 


436         ■  HOW  TO  KEEP  HOLY  DAYS. 

plan  which  he  intended  to  follow  towards  such 
beneficed  clergymen  as  refused  to  conform  to  his 
dicta  in  matters  of  ritual.     His  Lordship  intended, 
he  said,  in  such  cases,  to  place  the  fact  on  record 
in  his  episcopal  registry,  and  thereupon  to  break 
off  all  communication  with  the  clergyman  in  ques- 
tion.    However,  Mr.  De  la  Bere  had  not  long  to 
wait   for   the   information  which   he  had  asked ; 
for  on  the  22nd,  being  Monday  in  Holy  Week,  he 
was  served  with  an  official  document  citing  him, 
in  consequence  of  the  Bishop's  Letters  of  Eequest, 
to  enter  an  appearance,  personally  or  by  proctor, 
at  the  registry  of  Lord  Penzance's  court  "  on  the 
sixth   day  following," — that  is    to  say,  either   on 
Easter  Even,   or,   if  Good  Friday  was  not  to  be 
reckoned,  then  on  Easter  Monday.      Mr.  De   la 
Bere   was    now    charged   not   only   with    certain 
practices   the  carrying   on   of  which  was  a  dis- 
obedience to  Lord  Penzance's  monition  issued  in 
the  previous  suit,  but  also  with  offences  committed 

On  the  24th  of  July  application  was  made  for 
the  admission  of  more  articles ;  the  new  articles 
stating  what  Mr.  De  la  Bere  had  done  since  his 
pretended  suspension  by  the  court.  On  the  20th 
of  November  the  matter  was  brought  before  Lord 
Penzance  again,  and  the  court  was  prayed  for  a 
sentence  of  deprivation.  Judgment  was  reserved, 
and  delivered  on  the  21st  of  December,  to  the 
effect  that  the  Judge  was  prepared  to  pass  sen- 
tence as  prayed  ;  as,  however,  the  ancient  practice 
was  for  the  promoter  of  such  a  suit  to  draw 
up  the    sentence    in   writing,  he    should  adjourn 


the  court  until  the  8th  of  January,  1881,  and  then 
declare  the  articles  proved,  and  pass  sentence 
accordingly.  Which  things  he  did,  accordingly, 
as  he  had  promised,  declaring  Mr.  De  la  Bere 
guilty  of  contempt  or  contumacy,  of  incorrigible 
disobedience  to  the  Ordinary,  of  incorrigible  dis- 
obedience to  the  canons  of  the  Church,  and  of 
failure  to  observe  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer ; 
and  thereupon  passed  upon  him  a  sentence  of 

Against  this  sentence  a  rule  iiisi  was  moved 
for  in  the  Chancery  Division  of  the  High  Court  of 
Justice  on  the  14th  of  January,  1881,  calling  upon 
Lord  Penzance  and  the  promoter  of  the  suit  to 
show  cause  why  a  writ  of  prohibition  should  not 
issue  against  the  publication  and  confirmation  of 
the  sentence  pronounced  by  Lord  Penzance  on  the 
Sth,  The  Master  of  the  Polls  (Sir  George  Jessel) 
granted  the  rule. 

On  the  5th  of  January,  1881,  Mr.  De  la  Bere 
published  a  letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
complaining  of  the  character  of  the  proceedings 
taken  against  him.  This  letter  was  dated  the  23rd 
■of  the  preceding  December.  We  have  already 
quoted  the  account  given  in  it  of  the  mobbing 
•of  Prestbury  Church  on  Passion  Sunday,  1878. 
On  the  Sunday  after  the  publication  of  Mr.  De  la 
Bere's  letter  the  outrage  was  repeated.  "  On  this 
■occasion,"  says  Mr.  De  la  Bere,  "  the  mob  employed 
was  a  much  larger  one  than  before.  They  numbered 
several  hundreds,  and  consisted,  for  the  most  part, 
of  the  class  familiar  only  to  myself  and  others  here 
as  passing  through  our  village  on  occasion  of  race- 

438  THE    MOB    SENT    AGAIN 

meetings    and   other    similar   attractions    in   the 
neighbourhood.     On  this  occasion,  the  first  Sun- 
day after  Epiphany  of  the  present  year,  a  crowd 
of  this    description  poured   out   of  the   town   of 
Cheltenham,  some  of  its  rougher  elements  being, 
as  I  understood  at  the  time,  especially  engaged 
from   Gloucester,   and   thronged   the    churchyard 
some  time  before    the  commencement  of  Divine 
Service  at  eleven.     Happily,  some  suspicion  of  the 
probable    reappearance    of   this    horrible    pheno- 
menon had  suggested  arrangements  on  the  part  of 
the  churchwardens  and  the  police,  as  wise  as  they 
proved  effectual,  for  the  protection  of  the  usual 
congregation  by  whom,  and  by  whom  alone,  the 
church  was  permitted  to  be  filled ;  and  with  this 
strange    and   awful    environment   we    celebrated 
Divine  Service.     Now,  it  was  naturally  asked  on 
this  as  on  the  former  occasion,  Why  did  these  men 
come  ?  and,  Wlio  sent  them  ?     They  were  plainly 
not   of  a  class  which  interests    itself  in  religious 
controversy,    and  I   am   very  sure   they  did   not 
come  spontaneously.     Poor  fellows,  I  do  not  blame 
them.     They  had  evidently  little  heart  in  what  they 
were  about,  and  were  baffled  by  the  arrangements 
which  awaited  them  and  frustrated  apparently  the 
purpose  of  their  coming.    They  stood,  and  stared, 
and   crowded,  raising   an   occasional   shout,   and 
then,  soon  after  the  conclusion  of  Divine  Service, 
they  dispersed,  and  never  came  again.     But  I  do 
hold  deeply  guilty  those  dastards,  whoever  they 
may  be,  who  are  responsible  for  the  use  of  such 
dangerous  weapons,  and  on  whom  the  sin  and  the 
shame  of  this  second  desecration  rests.     I  at  once 


sent  to  the  Church  Times,  in  a  letter  addressed  to 
the  Editor,  a  brief  statement  of  the  facts  of  the  case, 
and  they  could  hardly  fail  to  become  otherwise 
gradually  known  far  beyond  the  immediate  neigh- 
bourhood ;  but,  so  far  as  I  am  aware,  no  condem- 
nation of  the  resort  to  such  weapons  has  come  as 
yet  from  any  in  spiritual  authority  over  us.  I 
desire,  however,  to  record,  with  gratitude,  the  fact 
that  from  one  Nonconformist  pulpit  of  Cheltenham 
words  of  noble  and  outspoken  condemnation  went 
forth.  As  to  any  collusion  which  may  have  ex- 
isted between  the  hidden  workers  who  sent  the 
mob  and  those  almost  equally  hidden  ones  who 
are  responsible  for  the  prosecution,  it  is  impossible 
even  to  surmise  ;  but  that  the  former  acted  as  the 
auxiliaries  of  the  latter  the  occasion  of  their  action 
irresistibly  suggests."  * 

Mr.  Baghot  de  la  Bere  had  appealed  against 
Lord  Penzance's  sentence  of  deprivation,  not  on 
the  merits  of  the  case,  but  on  one  of  the  most 
trivial  points  which  could  possibly  be  raised  by 
way  of  objection.  Lord  Penzance  had  pronounced 
the  sentence  while  sitting  in  one  of  the  committee- 
rooms  of  the  House  of  Lords ;  and  the  validity  of 
the  sentence  depended,  in  law,  upon  the  assump- 
tion that  the  Houses  of  Parliament,  with  their 
committee-rooms  and  other  premises  appertaining, 
were  not  in  law  a  royal  palace.  On  behalf  of  Mr. 
Baghot  de  la  Bere  it  was  alleged  that  they  were 
such  a  palace,  and  therefore  exempt,  like  those 

*  St.  Mary's,  Prestbury.  The  Attem/pted  Deprivation  of  the 
Vicar.  Being  a  Second  Letter  to  his  Grace  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  pp.  4,  5. 

440      MR.    BAGHOT    DE    LA    BERE'S    APPEAL    DISALLOWED. 

palaces  in  which  the  Sovereign  of  England  resides, 
from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  judges.  The  question 
was  argued  in  part  on  the  6th  of  December,  1881, 
in  the  Chancery  Division  of  the  High  Court  of 
Justice,  before  Mr.  Justice  Chitty,  Sir  George  Jessel 
having  been  appointed  to  the  Court  of  Appeal. 
The  hearing  was  resumed  on  the  15th  and  con- 
tinued on  the  20tli  of  March,  1882,  before  the 
Master  of  the  EoUs  (Sir  Wilham  Baliol  Brett, 
afterwards  Lord  Esher),  Lord  Justice  Cotton,  and 
Lord  Justice  Bowen ;  and  these  authorities  con- 
curred in  pronouncing  that  the  Houses  of  Parlia- 
ment were  not  a  royal  palace  in  the  sense  contended, 
and  that  therefore  Lord  Penzance's  sentence  was 
valid.  This  judgment  was  delivered  in  the  begin- 
ning of  December  1882.  Mr.  De  la  Bere  continued 
to  deny  Lord  Penzance's  sj)iritual  jurisdiction  in 
toto  ;  but  he  deemed  it  best,  all  things  considered, 
to  resign  his  living  at  last.  The  patron,  however, 
presented  a  clergyman  of  like  views,  who  was  duly 
instituted  by  the  Bishop  :  so  much  did  the  Low- 
Church  cause  gain  by  unprincipled  action  in  this 
case.  The  action  fell  heavily  upon  the  individual 
clergyman  attacked,  but  that  was  all ;  nor  was 
even  he  altogether  silenced,  for  he  undertook  a 
curacy  at  Brighton. 

We  will  now  return  to  Mr.  Dale,  who  had,  it 
will  be  remembered,  been  inhibited  by  Lord  Pen- 
zance, but  had  paid  no  regard  to  the  pretended 
spiritual  sentence.  On  the  28tli  of  October,  1880, 
the  noble  Lord  sat  in  his  dressing-room  at  the 
House  of  Lords  to  hear  cases.  In  the  case  of  Mr. 
Dale,  application  was  made  on  behalf  of  the  prose- 


cutioii — that  is,  of  the  "  Church  Association  " — that 
he  might  be  signified  in  contempt  for  disobedience. 
The  apphcation  was  granted ;  and  at  about  half- 
past  seven  o'clock  on  the  following  Saturday  even- 
ing Mr.  Dale  was  arrested  and  lodged  in  HoUoway 
Prison.  And  in  accordance  with  the  prison  regu- 
lations, with  which  the  churchwardens,  his  perse- 
cutors, appear  to  have  been  not  unacquainted,  he 
had  on  the  following  day  (Sunday)  no  food  save 
the  ordinary  prison  fare,  and  no  means  of  commu- 
nicating with  his  friends. 

This  act  made  many  Low-Churchmen  ashamed. 
The  Record  regarded  it  with  the  greatest  possible 
regret.  Done  as  it  was  with  a  view  merely  to 
getting  the  money,  it  was  not,  said  the  Editor,  a 
course  which  a  Christian  man  could  consistently 
take  in  the  conduct  of  his  own  private  affairs,  and 
its  propriety  was  not  increased  by  the  fact  that  the 
loss  of  the  money  would  fall,  not  on  any  individual, 
but  on  a  society  supported  by  public  subscription. 
Messrs.  Moore  and  Cuney,  the  proctors  for  the 
"  Church  Association,"  had  refused  to  have  any- 
thing to  do  with  the  writ  of  signijicavit,  so  that  a 
less  scrupulous  lawyer  had  to  be  engaged.  And 
the  Council  of  the  Association  was  greatly  puzzled 
what  to  do  next,  though  (as  a  member  of  the 
Council  was  heard  one  day  to  say  to  a  fellow- 
Protestant)  they  "  had  one  wretch  in  prison,  and 
hoped  soon  to  have  another  or  two."  What  they 
desired  was  to  attack  some  High-Church  bishop 
and  get  him  deprived  of  his  see.*     And  the  Eev. 

*  Conversation  reported  in  the  Church  Times  for  November 
12,  1880. 

442  MR.  dale's  property  sequestered. 

Dr.  Potter,  Vicar  of  St.  Luke's,  Sheffield,  thus  ad- 
dressed the  Derby  working-men's  branch  of  the 
Association  : — "  Dr.  Johnson  said,  the  plea  of  con- 
science is  the  best  plea  of  the  scoundrel.  I  ask 
you  not  to  listen  to  the  lachrymose,  whining,  sup- 
pliant cry,  '  Poor  Mr.  Dale !  Putting  him  in 
prison  for  conscience'  sake ! '  I  say.  Keep  him 
in,  the  old  rascal,  till  he  says  he  is  willing  to  leave 
his  church  and  resign  his  benefice.  I  would  then 
be  one  of  the  first  to  open  his  prison  doors,  and 
say.  Away  to  the  Tiber,  old  boy."  This  speech 
was  received  with  laughter  and  loud  applause.* 

The  majority  of  the  "  Church  Association"  felt, 
no  doubt,  that  they  had  committed  themselves  to 
one  Hue,  and  deemed  it  best  to  put  a  bold  face 
upon  the  matter  and  go  straight  on.  Therefore, 
on  the  28th  of  August,  1881,  apphcation  was  made 
to  the  Lord  Chancellor  on  the  part  of  the  com- 
plainants for  a  sequestration  attaching  Mr.  Dale's 
property  for  the  payment  of  costs.f  The  Lord 
Chancellor,  understanding  that  he  had  no  option 
in  the  case,  made  the  order  as  prayed ;  and  the 
tenants  on  Mr.  Dale's  private  freehold  property  at 
Orpington,  in  Kent,  were  served,  in  consequence, 
with  notices  to  pay  their  rents  to  the  sequestrators. 
The  rents  of  this  property  had  been  taken  from 
Mr.  Dale  the  year  before  to  liquidate  some  other 
costs.  Mr.  Dale  and  his  friends  were  willing  to 
pay  the  costs  of  his  last  prosecution,  but  the  coun- 
cil of  the  "  Church  Association"  rejected  his  offer 

*  Daihj  Advertiser,  cited  in  Church  Times  for  November  19, 

t  Church  Times,  September  16,  1881. 


of  doing  so,  preferring  to  reconp  themselves  for 
every  shilling  wliicli  they  had  spent  in  his  prose- 
cution by  sequestrating  his  private  property  for  the 
second  time.*  In  December  his  costs  amounted  to- 
£344  125.  M. 

Sequestration,  however,  was  not  the  only  means 
by  which  the  "  Church  Association  "  were  able  to 
recoup  themselves.  The  trustees  for  certain  chari- 
ties connected  with  the  parish  of  St.  Vedast  sent 
a  contribution  of  £25  to  the  Association,  and 
other  similar  trustees  sent  £50  ;  the  latter  being 
acknowledged  on  the  cover  of  the  Church  Associa- 
tion hitelligencer  for  1878  as  sent  by  the  church- 
wardens of  St.  Michael-le-Querne.  On  the  Vicar's 
inquiry  of  Mr.  Andrews,  the  Chairman  of  the  Asso- 
ciation, the  latter  replied  that  the  sums  of  money 
were  sent  by  Mr.  Horwood ;  and  this  latter  worthy 
(who  was  not  a  member  of  the  St.  Vedast  Trust) 
stated  at  a  vestry  meeting  that  the  amount  sub- 
scribed to  the  "  Church  Association  "  out  of  the 
charity  funds  for  the  prosecution  of  the  Eector 
(their  co-trustee)  was  in  the  accounts,  was  sanc- 
tioned, and  they  did  not  mean  to  alter  it.  In  the 
Church  Association  Intelligencer  for  February  1880 
another  subscription  was  announced  thus :  "  St, 
Vedast,  churchwardens  of,  on  behalf  of  the  parish,. 
£2  2s."  f 

In  December  Mr.  Dale  applied  to  the  Queen's 
Bench  Division  for  a  writ  of  habeas  co7yus,  on  the 
ground  that  his  committal  to  prison  had  been 
illegal ;  but  the  judges  (Lord  Chief  Justice  Cole- 

*  Church  Times,  October  28,  1881,  t  lb.  March  5,  1880, 

444  MR.    DALE    RELEASED. 

ridge,  and  Messrs.  Justices  Field  and  Manisty), 
after  several  days'  hearing,  unanimously  refused  to 
make  absolute  the  rule,  either  in  Mr.  Dale's  case 
or  in  that  of  Mr.  Enraght,  which  was  brought 
up  at  the  same  time.  (Mr.  Enraght  was  another 
faithful  Anglican  j^riest,  of  whom  we  shall  speak 
hereafter,  and  who  also  had  been  imprisoned  by 
the  "  Church  Associatipn  ").  This  judgment  was 
grounded  on  the  view  that  what  authority  Lord 
Penzance  had  for  judging  as  he  had  done  was 
derived,  and  rightly,  from  the  Public  Worship  Ee- 
gulation  Act  alone. 

On  the  18th  of  December  the  Court  of  Appeal 
agreed  to  take  bail  for  Mr.  Dale,  on  his  under- 
taking not  to  do  any  act  in  contravention  of  the 
sentence  of  inhibition.  To  this  Mr.  Dale  had  no 
difficulty  in  acceding,  as  his  church  was  being 
closed  for  repairs.  And  on  the  15th  of  January, 
1881,  the  Lords  Justices  James,  Brett,  and  Cotton, 
having  heard  the  arguments  on  his  appeal,  gave 
judgment  to  the  effect  that  both  in  Mr.  Dale's 
case  and  in  that  of  Mr.  Enraght  there  had  been 
an  informality  concerning  the  writ  of  signijicavit ; 
this  having  been  defectively  issued  from  the  Court 
of  Queen's  Bench  after  it  had  left  the  Petty  Bag 
Office  ;  and,  this  being  so,  that  Mr.  Dale  was  entitled 
to  be  discharged  from  that  writ,  and  that  Mr.  En- 
raght was  entitled  to  his  rule  for  a  habeas  corpus, 
with  a  view  to  his  being  discharged  as  well.*  And 
both  priests  were  accordingly  set  at  liberty. 

In   the   May  following    the  Bishop   of  London 
sequestered   Mr.  Dale's  living;    Mr.  Dale   having 

*  Church  Times,  January  21,  1881. 

A   BILL   OF   COSTS.  445 

been  appointed  to  the  rectory  of  Sausthorpe,  in 
Lincolnshire.  And  on  the  5th  of  August  Lord 
Penzance  was  prayed  to  make  an  order  against 
Mr.  Dale  declaring  him  in  contempt  for  not 
paying  the  costs  of  the  proceedings  against  him 
according  to  Lord  Penzance's  monition ;  which 
costs,  irrespective  of  those  incurred  in  the  Queen's 
Bench  Division,  had  been  taxed  at  £136  Is.  dd. 
Mr.  Gunnell,  of  the  firm  of  Brooks,  Jenkins,  and 
Co.,  appeared  for  Mr.  Dale ;  who,  it  appears,  had 
paid  all  the  costs  as  far  as  his  ability  went,  and 
had  now  exhausted  his  means.  Lord  Penzance, 
however,  made  the  order  as  prayed  by  the  prose- 


Immoral  Period,  continued.  Low-Church  Promotions.  Fraternis- 
ing with  Dissent.  Low-Church  DecHne.  "  Neo-EvangeUcals." 
Dictation  by  the  "  Church  Pastoral  Aid  Society."  Kev.  E.  W. 
Eandall  refused  the  Pulpit  of  Bristol  Cathedral. 

"  I  said,  My  leanness,  my  leanness,  woe  unto  me  !  the  treacher- 
ous dealers  have  dealt  treacherously ;  yea,  the  treacherous  dealers 
have  dealt  very  treacherously." — Isaiah  xxiv.  16. 

The  return  of  Earl  Cairns  to  the  woolsack  in  1874 
was  agreeably  felt  in  the  Low-Church  ranks :  for 
the  noble  earl  was  a  Presbyterian,  and  used  the 
ecclesiastical  patronage  connected  with  his  office 
in  the  interests  of  that  party  in  the  Church  with 
which  Presbyterians  had  most  sympathies.  The 
livings  of  All  Souls,  Langham  Place,  St.  Mary-le- 
Strand,  and  St.  Olave,  Jewry,  were  filled  up  with 
men  who  immediately  set  about  undoing  the  work 

■446  REV.    J.    C.    RYLE. 

of  their  High-Church  predecessors.  And  we  be- 
lieve that  Lord  Cairns  never  once  promoted  a  pro- 
nounced High-Churchman. 

In  the  year  1880,  the  deanery  of  SaUsbury 
beinof  vacant.  Lord  Beaconsfield,  who  was  then 
Premier,  preferred  to  it  the  Eev.  John  Charles 
Eyle,  Vicar  of  Stradbroke,  in  Suffolk.  Before, 
however,  Mr.  Eyle  could  be  installed,  he  received 
promotion  to  a  still  higher  place.  An  endowment 
had  been  made  up  for  a  new  diocese  to  be  taken 
out  of  the  Diocese  of  Chester,  and  with  Liverpool 
for  its  seat ;  and  to  the  bishopric  of  this  Orange- 
ridden  town  Lord  Beaconsfield  made  haste  to 
appoint  Mr.  Eyle.  In  this  appointment,  said  the 
Treasurer  of  the  "  Church  Association,"  Lord  Bea- 
consfield "  desired  to  show  his  sympathy — as  in- 
deed he  had  always  shown  his  sympathy — with 
the  Protestantism  of  the  Church  of  England."  * 
Mr.  Eyle  had  taken  a  remarkably  good  degree  at 
Oxford,  but  knew  nothing  of  theology.  His  chief 
distinction  arose  from  the  tracts  which  had  come 
forth  from  his  pen  by  hundreds,  and  which  were 
written  in  unusually  plain  and  forcible  English ; 
being,  in  fact,  models  of  that  kind  of  composition, 
except  so  far  as  they  were  spoilt  by  the  writer's 
self-assertion.  Mr.  Eyle  was  also  a  vice-president 
of  the  "  Church  Association ; "  and  when,  on  his 
appointment  to  the  Liverpool  bishopric,  he  was 
obliged  for  appearance'  sake  to  withdraw  from  the 
membership  of  the  Association,  he  did  not  omit  to 
intimate  his  intention  of  working  in  the  interests 
of  the  Association,  as  he  said,  "  in  other  ways." 

*  Speech  at  a  meeting  held  in  March  1880. 

WHY    MADE   A   BISHOP?  447 

One  is  reminded  of  the  saying  of  Themistocles, 
"  May  I  never  sit  on  a  tribunal  where  my  friends 
shall  not  find  more  favour  from  me  than  strangers. "  * 

It  was  believed  that  in  appointing  Mr.  Eyle  to 
the  bishopric  the  Earl  of  Beaconsfield  sought  to 
be  revenged  upon  the  High-Church  party,  because 
that  party  had  been  remiss  in  supporting  Conser- 
vative candidates  at  the  hustings.  And  certainly 
High-Churchmen  were  so  displeased  with  the 
Premier  for  supporting  the  Public  Worship  Eegu- 
lation  Bill,  that  many  of  them  felt  precluded  in 
conscience  from  voting  for  Conservatives  at  the 
election  which  followed  so  soon  afterwards;  and 
either  voted  in  the  "  Liberal  "  interest,  or  did  not 
vote  at  all. 

The  new  bishop  (who,  although,  as  he  afterwards 
said,  he  had  had  some  hesitation  about  accepting 
the  deanery,  had  had  none  at  all  about  accepting 
the  mitre)  took  that  line  of  administration  which 
might  have  been  expected  from  his  antecedents. 
He  annoyed  High-Churchmen  for  obeying  the 
Prayer-book  instead  of  what  the  Privy  Council 
pretended  to  think  was  law.  He  wrote  to  the 
Eev.  James  Bell  Cox,  Vicar  of  St.  Margaret's, 
Prince's  Eoad,  Liverpool :  f  "  Until  you  tell  me  in 
writing  that  in  future  you  will  undertake  neither 
to  do  nor  to  permit  others  to  do  anything  in  the 
services  of  your  church  which  has  been  declared 
illegal  by  recent  decisions  of  the  Queen's  courts 
of  law,  I  cannot  license  another  curate  for  you." 
He  delayed  his  consent  to  the  building  of  a  church 

•  Plutarch,  Life  of  Aristides. 
t  October  4,  1880. 

448  CONDUCT    OF    BISHOP    RYLE. 

the  patronage  of  which  would  be  in  High-Church 
hands.  When  a  layman  of  Liverpool  offered  to 
build  a  church  in  that  city  on  condition  that  the 
Clewer  Sisters  should  be  allowed  to  work  in  the 
district  which  should  be  attached  to  it,  Bishop 
Eyle  declined  the  offer ;  *  and  when  he  went  into 
Scotland  for  a  holiday,  he  not  only  absented  him- 
self from  Scottish  Episcopal  worship,  but  officiated 
like  a  Presbyterian  minister  in  at  least  one  Pres- 
byterian kirk,  and  treated  the  Scottish  Episcopal 
communion,  as  represented  in  the  priest  of  the 
neighbourhood,  with  marked  contempt. f 

Nor  were  Bishop  Eyle's  the  only  instances,  af- 
forded about  this  time,  of  traitorous  fraternising 
with  antagonistic  communions.  In  the  spring  of 
1876  the  Eev.  Gordon  Calthrop,  Vicar  of  St.  Au- 
gustine's, Highbury,  had  offered  to  take  part  in 
the  proceedings  at  laying  the  foundation-stone  of 
a  great  meeting-house  in  Upper  Street,  Islington, 
this  meeting-house  being  about  to  be  built  for  the 
Eev.  Dr.  AUon,  an  Independent  preacher  of  some 
notoriety.  The  Bishop  of  London  interfered,  and 
Mr.  Calthrop  did  not  take  part  in  the  ceremonial ; 
but  he  went  to  the  lunch  which  was  afterwards 

*  Church  Times,  November  17,  1882. 

t  The  Eev.  H.  St.  John  Howard,  writing  to  the  Church  Times 
from  Pitlochrie  about  the  Episcopal  Cbm-ch  whereof  he  was  the 
incumbent,  said :  "  The  Bishop  of  Liverpool  has  been  here  some 
weeks,  but  I  cannot  discover  that  he  has  attended  any  service  in 
our  church,  although  we  have  five  services  every  Sunday.  He 
has,  however,  been  to  the  two  Presbyterian  kirks,  and  yesterday 
preached  in  the  Presbyterian  parish  kirk  at  Blair  Athole.  Shortly 
after  his  arrival  here  I  called  and  left  my  card,  lest  I  should  seem 
to  be  lacking  in  courtesy  to  a  bishop  of  our  communion.  Dr.  Ryle 
has  taken  no  notice  whatever  of  my  visit."  The  letter  is  dated 
September  11,  1882. 


held,  and  made  a  speech  at  it.*  In  December 
1877  a  handbill  was  freely  distributed  in  the  town 
of  Southsea  announcing  an  address  by  the  Eev. 
James  Ormiston,  Vicar  of  Old  Hill,  near  Dudley, 
entitled  "  Eitualism — it  dishonours  Christ  and 
dethrones  the  Bible."  This  handbill  was  headed 
"  Church  Association,"  and  concluded  thus : — 
"  Persons  of  all  denominations  are  cordially  in- 
vited to  attend  to  receive  information  on  this 
important  subject.  A  collection  will  be  made 
for  the  Association."  In  April  1878  Archdeacon 
Blunt,  called  by  the  Church  Times  "  a  pet  of  the 
Archbishop  of  York,"  and  who  was  Vicar  of 
Scarborough,  and  the  Eev.  Eobert  Brown  Borth- 
wick,  Vicar  of  All  Saints',  Palsgrave,  dined  with 
the  Yorkshire  Congregational  Union,  the  season 
of  Lent  not  being  ended.  One  of  the  speakers  on 
this  occasion  specified,  as  the  only  terms  on  which 
Nonconformists  would  unite  with  Churchpeople, 
the  unconditional  sweeping  away  of  the  Esta- 
blishment, and  of  sacerdotal  usurpation  ;  whatever 
that  might  mean.'f*  In  December  1880  the  Eev. 
Augustus  Prederick  BenweU,  Vicar  of  Emmanuel 
Church,  Hastings,  presided  at  a  meeting  of  Ply- 
mouth Brethren,  when  the  address  was  given  by 
Lord  Eadstock,  a  well-known  Nonconformist ;  "^ 
and  about  the  same  time  the  Eev.  Porbes  Edward 
Winslow,  Eector  of  St.  Paul's,  St.  Leonards,  allowed 
a  Nonconformist  tradesman  to  put  on  a  surplice 
and  read  lessons  in  church.^     In  April  1881  the 

*  Church  Times  for  May  10,  1876. 

t  lb.  AprU  18,  1878.  X  lb.  December  17,  1880. 

§  lb. 

II.  30 


President  of  the  Chiswick  branch  of  the  "  Church 
Association "  was  advertised  to  lay  a  memorial- 
stone  of  an  Independent  meeting-house  near  Turn- 
ham  Green.*  And  in  the  same  year  Dr.  Martin 
Clark,  a  Presbyterian  of  pronounced  views,  and 
who  had  informed  the  "  Church  Missionary  So- 
ciety "  thereof,  was  appointed  by  that  Society  to  a 
medical  mission  at  Amritzar  in  India,  with  a  salary 
of  £400  per  annum. f  Moreover,  when  the  Con- 
gregational Union  of  England  and  Wales  held 
their  session  at  Bristol,  the  Dean  of  the  Cathedral 
and  certain  other  Bristol  clergy  attended  a  meeting 
and  presented  an  address ;  in  which  address  they 
assured  the  assembled  Dissenters  that  they  recog- 
nised the  work  which  the  said  Dissenters  were  do- 
ing in  spreading  the  fundamental  truths  of  God's 
kingdom.  The  Dean  added  a  few  words  of  his 
own,  and  closed  what  he  called  the  most  pleasant 
act  in  his  official  life  by  pronouncing  "  The  Grace." 
(It  may  be  remarked  that  this  was  the  same  Very 
Eeverend  gentleman  who  had  married  a  divorced 
woman.)  Then  Canon  Girdlestone  (of  whom  more 
anon)  suggested  a  hymn,  and  the  President,  Dr. 
Macfadyen,  "  engaged  in  prayer."  The  address 
was  signed  by  fifty-eight  persons.  J  In  the  following 
month  the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury  laid  the  foundation- 
stone  of  an  Independent  meeting-house  in  West 
Kensington,  saying  that  he  knew  of  no  difference 
between  the  faith  of  the  Nonconformists  whom  he 

*  Church  Times,  April  29,  1881. 
t  Church  Beview,  Jan.  13,  1882. 

X  Church  Times  for  October  20,  1882 ;  Christian  Globe,  Octo- 
ber 19,  1882. 


saw  around  him  and  his  own.*  Nor  was  such 
fraternising  with  Dissent  on  the  part  of  Low- 
Churchmen  at  all  a  new  thing.  At  a  meeting  of 
the  British  and  Foreign  Bible  Society  on  the  1st 
of  May,  1867,  Dr.  Miller — the  same  who  had  ini- 
tiated the  division  of  services  at  St.  Martin's,  Bir- 
mingham— spoke  thus  :  "  I  say  boldly  that  I  feel 
I  would  almost  say  a  thousandfold  more  sym- 
pathy with  a  Protestant  Dissenter  than  I  do  with 
a  Eitualistic  clergyman."  And  in  the  same  year, 
at  the  opening  of  a  new  organ  in  the  Wesleyan 
Meeting-house,  Fletcher  Street,  Bolton-le-Moors, 
Lancashire,  the  Eev.  Henry  Powell,  Vicar  of  the 
parish,  and  Hon.  Canon  of  Manchester,  was 
present ;  likewise  the  Eev.  Charles  Hind,  Incum- 
bent of  St.  Paul's,  and  the  Eev.  Edmund  War- 
breck.  Curate  of  Walmesley ;  and  Mr.  Bartholo- 
mew, organist  at  the  parish  church  of  Ludlow, 

But  perhaps  some  of  the  worst  instances  of  this 
sort  of  thing  were  seen  in  connexion  with  Messrs. 
Moody  and  Sankey,  the  American  revivalists.  In 
March  1879  Mr.  Ira  Sankey  was  allowed  to  per- 
form in  the  parish  church  of  Chapel-en-le-Frith, 
Derbyshire,  the  rector  of  which  was  the  Eev. 
George  Hall.  A  platform  was  erected  for  Mr. 
Sankey  under  the  chancel-arch,  and  an  American 
organ  placed  at  his  disposal.  The  Eev.  Samuel 
Henry  Pink,  and  Mr.  Greaves  Bagshawe  the 
churchwarden,  were  responsible  for  this  scandal.J 

*  Christian  World,  November  9,  1882. 

t  Bolton  Chronicle,  cited  in  Church  News,  December  18, 1867. 

X  Guardian,  March  26,  1879,  p.  416. 



On  Sunday,  JSTovember  5,  1882,  notice  was  given 
in  Trinity  Church,  Cambridge,  of  a  collection 
on  the  Sunday  following  for  defraying  Messrs. 
Moody  and  Sankey's  expenses.  And  on  the  fol- 
lowing Tuesday  a  public  meeting  was  held  in  the 
same  church — once  Mr.  Simeon's,  and  the  patron- 
age whereof  had  been  acquired  by  his  trustees  ; 
and  those  few  persons  who  attended  took  it  by 
turns  to  stand  up  in  their  pews,  make  speeches, 
and  offer  extempore  prayers  ;  the  Vicar  meanwhile 
(the  Eev.  John  Barton)  walking  about  among 
them  and  arranging  who  should  speak  or  offer 
prayer  next.*  The  president  on  this  occasion  was 
the  Eev.  Henry  Nevile  Sherbrooke,  Minister  of 
Portman  Chapel,  London,  and  who  hailed  from 
St.  Alban's  Hall,  Oxford  (though  without  a  degree), 
and  the  London  College  of  Divinity.  Mr.  Sankey 
sang  several  solos,  and  the  proceedings  were  closed 
with  a  prayer  by  the  Wesleyan  minister.f  Again, 
on  the  following  Thursday  Mr.  Sankey  not  only 
sang  a  solo,  but  offered  prayer,  in  the  same 
church.  J 

About  this  time  the  decline  of  the  Low-Church 
party  as  a  religious  force  became  more  marked. 
At  the  Islington  clerical  meeting  which  had  been 
held  in  January  1875,  there  was  some  lamenta- 
tion over  the  growing  worldliness  and  inefficiency 
of  the  Low-Church  clergy.  In  August  1878  an 
"  Old  Indian,"  writing  to  the  Record,  said :  "  I 
cannot  but  watch  with  aching  heart  the  visible 

*  Church  Times,  November  10,  1882. 
t  Morning  Post,  November  9,  1882, 
X  Church  Times,  November  17,  1882. 



decline  of  Protestant  feeling,  even  among  the 
truly  pious  members  of  our  Church."  From  a 
circular  issued  by  the  directors  of  Exeter  Hall  in 
the  summer  of  1879  it  appeared  that  the  crowds 
which  used  to  resort  to  that  place  of  religious 
meetings  had  much  diminished  ;  and  that  though 
the  small  hall  was  too  small  for  some  of  the 
societies  which  used  to  hold  their  annual  meetings 
there,  the  large  hall  was  too  large.  In  the  same 
year,  the  Bishop  of  Eipon  (Dr.  Bickersteth,  who 
had  occupied  the  see  for  more  than  twenty  years) 
gave  in  his  charge  a  little  piece  of  statistics,  by 
which  it  appeared  that  the  average  number  of 
communicants  in  his  diocese  was  between  thirteen 
and  fourteen  thousand,  and  that  the  gross  number 
might  be  one-third  more.  The  population,  how- 
ever, was  about  a  million  and  a  half ;  so  that  the 
number  of  communicants  was  only  about  one  per 
cent.  In  the  same  year  the  Secretary  of  the 
Working  Men's  Protestant  League  had  the  im- 
pertinence to  write  to  the  Dean  and  Chapter  of 
St.  Paul's  Cathedral  protesting  against  the  holding 
of  the  Three  Hours'  Service  on  Good  Friday. 

About  the  same  time  also  there  was  going  on 
amongst  Low-Churchmen  a  good  deal  of  mutual 
recrimination  ;  some  complaining  that  their  breth- 
ren were  too  high,  and  these  again,  that  their 
accusers  were  too  sweeping  in  their  abuse  of 
Eitualists  ;  and  it  was  urged  in  the  same  behalf 
that  some  doctrines,  commonly  deemed  the  ex- 
clusive possession,  in  the  Church  of  England,  of 
High-Churchmen,  had  been  held  by  Low-Church- 
men of  a  former  age.     How  far  this  was  true  our 


readers  will  form  their  own  opinion  ;  we  only  note 
now  a  claim  implicitly  put  forth  by  some  mem- 
bers of  the  party.  We  have  already  seen  that 
many  Low-Church  people  had  been  altering  their 
relio-ious  views  so  as  to  be  classed  either  with  Higrh- 
Church  people  or  with  Broad-Church  people ;  and 
many  of  these,  while  failing  to  receive  the  Catholic 
faith  in  its  integrity  and  with  all  its  consequences, 
allowed  Christian  charity  and  common-sense  to 
have  their  legitimate  play,  and  did  not  forbear  to 
mix  at  times  with  their  brethren  who  differed  from 
them.  These  excited  the  religious  fear  of  the 
Rock  and  its  adherents,  and  were  nicknamed  by 
them  Neo-Evangelicals ;  the  Rock  meanwhile  claim- 
ing to  be  the  true  representative  of  the  old  Evan- 
gelicals, and  inveighing  strongly  against  those 
who  would  join  with  Eitualists  in  any  religious 

An  instance  of  the  same  spirit,  when  the  an- 
nual Church  Congress  was  held  at  Swansea,  was 
afforded  by  the  "  Church  Pastoral  Aid  Society," 
more  truly  termed  the  Party  Pastoral  Dictation 
Society.  The  Eev.  Eli  Clarke,  Vicar  of  Christ 
Church  in  the  said  town,  was  desirous  of  having 
special  sermons  preached  in  his  church  during  the 
week  of  the  Congress,  but  was  unable  to  find  a  Low- 
Churchman  to  preach  them.  Under  these  circum- 
stances, and  on  the  suggestion  of  his  parishioners' 
churchwarden,  he  applied  to  the  Eev.  Eichard 
Meux  Benson,  Perpetual  Curate  of  Cowley  St.  John, 
Oxford,  and  Superior  of  the  Cowley  Fathers,  and 
who  had  been  invited  to  speak  at  the  Congress, 
and  w^as  a  native  of  the   town,   and  the  owner  of 

REV.    R.   M.    BENSON.  455 

much  property  in  the  neighbourhood.     Mr.  Ben- 
son  consented,  and  Mr.   Clarke's   account  of  the 
result  was   this  :    "  I  do  not  think  I  ever  heard 
two  more  eloquent,  earnest,  evangelical  sermons ; 
the  lowest  of  our  Evangelical  Church-people,  to- 
gether with  a   large    number  of  Nonconformists, 
were  delighted  and  strengthened  in  their  faith  and 
love  to  God,  and  no  one  more  so  than  myself." 
The  matter,  however,  was   reported  to  the  Com- 
mittee of  the  "  Church  Pastoral  Aid  Society,"  and 
"  the  Sub-Committee,    having  regard   to  the  fact 
that  Mr.  Benson,  one  of  the  noted  preachers  among 
the  Cowley  Fathers,  had  been  invited  to  preach  " 
at  Christ  Church,   recommended  that  the  grant  of 
£Q0  a  year  for  a  curate  should  be  stopped  ;  and 
the  General  Committee,   the  attendance  at  which 
was  stated  to  have  been  very  large,  having  "  fully 
and  patiently  "  (as  they  said)   considered  the  case, 
and  "  feeling  satisfied  that  the  proceedings  at  Christ 
Church  were  so  entirely  at  variance  with  the  views 
of  the    supporters   of  the    Church   Pastoral   Aid 
Society,"  confirmed  the  minute  of  the  Sub-Com- 
mittee, and  determined  that  the  grant  should  cease 
at  the  end  of  the  current  quarter — that  is,  on  the 
31st  of  January,  1880. 

About  the  same  time  the  Eev.  James  Alexander 
McMullen,  Vicar  of  Christ  Church,  Cobridge,  Staf- 
fordshire, felt  compelled  to  discontinue  the  use 
in  his  church  of  Hymns  Ancient  and  Modern, 
through  fear  of  losing  his  grant  from  the  same 
Society :  the  Secretary  having  warned  him  again 
and  again  against  retaining  it,  and  the  Society 
itself  looking  with   suspicion  on  those   churches 


where  it  was  found.  And  some  time  previously 
the  Society  had  deprived  the  Vicar  of  St.  Columb- 
the-Less,  Cornwall,  of  his  grant  for  the  Church  of 
Newquay  in  that  parish,  and  apparently  for  no 
other  reason  than  that  the  Vicar  refused  the 
Society's  dictation  as  to  what  hymn-book  should 
be  used  in  his  church.  An  emissary  of  the  Society 
had  declared  that  the  Society  could  not  sanction 
Hymns  Ancient  and  Modern,  and,  on  being  told 
that  the  congregation  could  not  be  expected  to 
buy  themselves  new  hymn-books,  had  replied, 
"  Our  Society  will  make  you  a  grant  to  overcome 
that  difficulty."  * 

It  was,  of  course,  to  be  expected  that  a  party 
which  fraternised  with  Dissenters  would  exclude 
good  Churchmen  from  the  pulpit,  even  where,  for 
any  s]3ecial  reason,  prosecution  was  not  in  con- 
templation. And  a  further  instance  hereof  was 
afforded  in  1881  by  the  Dean  and  Chapter  of 
Bristol.  Among  the  many  cliaritable  institutions 
connected  with  that  ancient  city  are  three  societies 
which  administer  charities  founded  by  an  eminent 
philanthropist  of  the  last  century,  Edward  Colston. 
These  societies  are  named  the  Dolphin,  the  Anchor, 
and  the  Grateful :  the  Dolphin  being  Conservative 
in  politics  ;  the  Anchor,  Eadical ;  and  the  Grateful, 
not  political  at  all.  Each  society  keeps  its  own 
annual  festival.  The  Dolphin  not  only  eats  a 
dinner,  but  hears  a  sermon,  preached  usually  in 
the  Cathedral,  and  the  preacher  being  nominated 
by  the  President  of  the  Society  for  the  time  being. 
The   Dean    of    Bristol    (the    Very   Eev.    Gilbert 

*  Letter  in  Clmrcli  Times  of  January  9,  1880. 


Elliot,  D.D.)  having,  by  his  marriage  with  a  di- 
vorced woman,  given  great  scandal,  found  it  ex- 
pedient to  live  in  retirement ;  and  the  affairs  of 
the  Cathedral  were  mainly  in  the  hands  of  Canon 
Girdlestone,  a  pronounced  Low-Churchman,  who 
(as  we  have  already  seen),  with  the  Dean  and 
certain  other  clergymen,  went  out  of  the  way  to 
express  sympathy  with  Dissenters  at  a  session  of 
the  Congregational  Union.  Owing  to  the  influence, 
it  was  believed,  of  this  dignitary  chiefly  (the  Dean 
being  at  the  time  abroad),  when  the  Eev.  Eichard 
William  Eandall,  Vicar  of  All  Saints',  Chfton,  had 
been  appointed  to  preach  the  sermon  before  the 
Dolphin  Society  on  the  Colston  Festival,  the  Cathe- 
dral pulpit  was  refused  for  the  purpose.  Mr. 
Eandall,  it  must  be  observed,  had  signalised  him- 
self and  his  church  by  what  was  called  high 
ritual,  and  Protestantism  was  very  strong  in  the 
city  of  Bristol.  All  attempts  to  get  the  Chapter 
to  rescind  their  resolution  having  failed.  Canon 
Norris  (whose  Low-Churchmanship  did  not,  it 
seems,  reach  to  the  depth  of  the  Dean's  and  Canon 
Girdlestone's),  placed  the  large  Church  of  St.  Mary, 
Eedcliffe,  of  which  he  was  vicar,  at  the  disposal  of 
the  Dolphin  Society  for  their  preacher  :  and  there, 
accordingly,  Mr.  Eandall  delivered  his  sermon. 
The  Council  of  the  "  Church  Association,"  how- 
ever, passed  a  resolution  thanking  Canon  Girdle- 
stone  for  what  he  had  done. 



Immoral  Period,  continued.     Persecution  of  the  Rev.  R.  Enraght» 

"  They  watched  Him,  and  sent  forth  spies,  which  should  feign 
themselves  just  men  .  .  .  that  so  they  might  deliver  Him  unto  the 
power  and  authority  of  the  governor." — Luke  xx.  20. 

We  have  now  to  clironicle  another  persecution, 
known  as  the  Bordesley  one  ;  and  in  the  course  of 
which  a  scandal  was  given  which  had  been,  up  to 
the  time  when  it  was  perpetrated,  without  pre- 

In  the  year  1874  the  Eev.  Eichard  WiUiam 
Enraght  had  become  Vicar  of  Holy  Trinity,  Bor- 
desley (a  suburb  of  Birmingham),  on  the  presen- 
tation of  the  Vicar  of  Aston,  in  whose  patronage 
the  living  then  was.  Previously  to  the  Easter 
of  1878  the  parishioners'  churchwarden  was  a  Mr. 
Thomas  Harris  ;  and  attempts  had  been  repeatedly 
made  on  the  part  of  a  Mr.  William  Adkins  to  stir 
him  up  against  the  Vicar,  on  account  of  those  Ca- 
tholic practices  which  Mr.  Enraght  had  continued 
in  the  church  from  the  time  of  his  predecessor,  Dr. 
Oldknow.  A  person  named  Greening,  too,  had 
exerted  himself  to  get  proceedings  instituted  under 
the  Public  Worship  Eegulation  Act,  and  had  been 
heard  to  say,  "  It  is  three  aggrieved  parishioners, 
that  we  want." 

Three  aggrieved  parishioners,  however,  were 
not   to   be   found,    and    therefore   Mr.    Enraght's 

*  Most  of  the  following  particulars  are  taken  from  a  pamphlet 
by  the  Rev.  R.  Enraght,  entitled  My  Prosecution  under  the  Puhlia 
Worship  Begulation  Act,  Birmingham  and  London,  1883. 


enemies  sought  to  avail  themselves  of  that  clause 
in  the  Act  which  allows  proceedings  to  be  com- 
menced by  one  person,  when  that  person  is  a 
churchwarden.  And  in  1878  the  Easter  vestry- 
meeting,  which  used  to  be  attended  by  no  more 
than  half  a  dozen  persons  or  so,  was  suddenly 
invaded  by  a  number  of  men,  several  of  whom 
were  Dissenters ;  and  by  a  show  of  hands  a  per- 
son named^John  Perkins  was  elected  parishioners' 
churchwarden.  A  poll  was  immediately  demanded, 
but  on  the  urgent  request  of  the  Vicar,  who  did 
not  wish  the  peace  of  the  parish  to  be  disturbed, 
no  poll  was  taken.  Perkins  was  in  the  employ- 
ment of  Mr.  Greening,  of  whom  we  shall  hear 
more  by-and-by. 

As  soon  as  this  vantage-ground  had  been 
gained,  the  war  commenced.  Certain  persons 
formed  themselves  into  what  they  called  a  "  Parish 
Committee,"  and  met  together  continually  to 
arrange  plans  of  attack.  They  acted  in  concert 
with  the  "  Church  Association,"  several  of  them 
being  members  of  it.  Nor  was  the  membership  of 
the  "  Parish  Committee  "  confined  to  the  Church 
of  England :  some  of  that  Committee  were  Dis- 
senters. The  parish  was  now  placarded  with 
handbills  intended  to  stir  up  the  inhabitants 
against  the  Vicar.  A  doggerel  rhyme  was  circu- 
lated, to  the  effect  that  Mr.  Enraght's  motive  in 
exhorting  to  liberality  at  the  offertory  was  his  own 
personal  gain ;  the  fact  being  that  of  the  money 
collected  at  the  offertory  he  got  none.  Five  in- 
flammatory lectures  were  delivered  in  the  parish — 
one  by  a  clergyman  named  Wainwright,  apparently 


the  one  of  Islington  notoriety  who  allowed  the 
letters  for  "  Doctor  of  Divinity  "  to  be  appended  to 
his  name,  his  college  being  really  that  of  St.  Bees. 
And  it  would  seem  that  this  lecture  was  afterwards 
delivered  by  the  same  reverend  gentleman  at 
Wolverhampton,  and  occasioned  the  Eev.  Henry 
BoUand,  Vicar  of  St.  James's,  Wolverhampton,  and 
Eural  Dean,  to  write  thus  to  the  secretary  of  the 
local  branch  of  the  "  Church  Association  :  " — "  I 
must  put  my  charity  above  my  Protestantism,  and 
I  cannot  consent  to  remain  any  longer  in  a  branch 
of  the  Church  Association  which  has  allowed  such 
a  lecture  to  be  delivered  as  I  have  had  to  listen  to 
this  evening."  * 

On  the  31st  of  May  Perkins  and  other  persons 
alleged  to  be  parishioners  presented  to  the  Bishop 
of  Worcester  (Dr.  Philpott)  a  paper  of  charges 
touching  what  they  called  illegalities  in  Mr.  En- 
racfht's  conduct  of  Divine  Service.     These  were : 


processions — lighted  candles — the  Eucharistic  vest- 
ments— bowing  and  prostration — the  service  of 
acolytes — elevation  of  the  consecrated  elements — 
the  use  of  a  biretta — the  eastward  position  (or,  as 
the  "  Church  Association "  preferred  to  state  it, 
"  hiding  the  manual  acts  ") — the  mixed  chalice — 
the  singing  of  Agnus  Dei — the  signing  the  cross 
in  the  air — and  "  the  sign  of  the  cross  on  the 
Communion-table."  On  which  charges  Mr.  Enraght 
remarked  that  he  had  never  directed  or  sanctioned 

*  The  above  particulars  are  taken  partly  from  Mr.  Enraght's 
pamphlet  specified  above,  and  partly  from  a  speech  of  Mr. 
Enraght's,  delivered  at  a  vestry  meeting  of  the  parish. 


"  prostrations  "  nor  elevation  of  the  consecrated 
elements,  never  worn  a  biretta  during  any  ser- 
vice, never  done  anything  with  a  view  to  hiding 
the  manual  acts  in  consecrating  the  elements,  nor 
ever  knelt  in  the  Consecration-prayer.  But  in  this 
part  of  the  proceedings  the  least  creditable  share 
was,  in  our  opinion,  that  which  was  borne  by  the 
Bishop ;  for  his  Lordship  had  welcomed  Mr.  En- 
raght  to  the  diocese,  and  had  held  two  confir- 
mations in  Holy  Trinity  Church,  and  although 
he  knew  perfectly  well  that  Mr.  Enraght  was  but 
continuing  the  ceremonial  which  he  found  at  the 
church  on  Dr.  Oldknow's  decease,  yet  he  gave  no 
sign  of  disapproval.  Now,  however,  he  required 
Mr.  Enraght  to  desist  from  four  ceremonial  usages, 
namely,  the  use  of  lighted  candles  when  not  wanted 
for  light,  the  use  of  the  alb  and  chasuble,  the  use 
of  the  mixed  chalice,  and  the  signing  the  cross 
towards  the  people.  This  was  on  the  14th  of  June. 
Mr.  Enraght  was  unable  to  conform  to  the 
Bishop's  direction  on  the  first  two  of  these,  as 
otherwise  he  would  have  disobeyed  the  order  of 
the  Prayer-book  as  given  in  the  Ornaments'  Eubric. 
But  he  expressed  himself  ready  to  obey  on  the 
last  two,  thinking  that  it  might  come  within  the 
Bishop's  canonical  jurisdiction  to  rule  as  he  did  in 
regard  of  them.  And  when  the  Bishop  intimated 
that  he  could  not  accept  this  concession,  Mr. 
Enraght  made  two  further  offers.  He  would  either 
obey  the  Bishop  on  all  four  points  at  and  after 
11  o'clock  on  Sundays,  or,  if  the  Bishop  would 
give  him  a  canonical  trial  before  himself,  and  so 


satisfy  his  scruples  as  to  obeying  the  decrees  of 
what  he  held  to  be  the  usurped  jurisdiction  of  a 
mere  State-court,  he  promised  to  conform  impli- 
citly to  his  Lordship's  judgment,  pending  the  result 
of  an  appeal  on  his  part  to  the  Convocation  of 

The  Bishop  expressed  himself  unable  to  accept 
either  of  these  proposals.  Nor  could  he  have  been 
expected  to  accept  the  last ;  for  if  he  had  heard 
Mr.  Enraght  judicially,  and  Mr.  Enraght  had  suc- 
ceeded in  making  good  his  case,  the  Bishop,  by 
giving  judgment  in  his  favour,  would  have  acted 
in  antagonism  to  the  Privy  Council  and  Lord 
Penzance.  But  when,  at  Easter-tide  1879,  Mr.  John 
Perkins  made  a  representation  against  Mr.  Enraght 
under  the  terms  of  the  Public  Worship  Eegulation 
Act,  the  Bishop  allowed  proceedings  to  be  taken ; 
and  notified  the  same  to  Mr.  Enraght  on  the  2nd 
of  May.  It  should  be  observed  that  Mr.  C.  B. 
Cooper,  a  former  secretary  to  the  Birmingham 
branch  of  the  "  Church  Association,"  had  already 
written  to  Mr.  Enraght  informing  him  of  what  was 
intended  against  him  in  case  he  did  not  alter  the 
ritual  of  his  church. 

As  soon  as  this  became  known,  certain  influen- 
tial Churchmen  of  Birmingham  asked  Mr.  Enraght's 
permission  to  mediate  between  him  and  his  enemies, 
in  hope  of  a  possible  compromise.  Mr.  Enraght 
thereupon  made  a  proposal  which,  Mr.  Kynnersley 
(a  stipendiary  magistrate  to  whom  the  "Parish 
Committee"  submitted)  thought,  ought  to  satisfy 
any  reasonable  person.  What  this  proposal  was  we 
are  not  told.     Mr.  Enraght  afterwards  obtained  a 

ITS   OBJECT.  463 

personal  interview  with  his  enemies,  and  offered 
certain  concessions,  which  were  rejected. 

On  the  4th  of  July,  however,  the  Convocation 
of  Canterbury  passed  a  proposed  rider  to  the  Or- 
naments' Eubric,  according  to  which,  if  it  became 
law,  Mr.  Enraght  would  be  bound  to  obey  the 
Bishop  on  the  question  of  Vestments.  Mr.  Enraght 
therefore  complied  with  the  provisions  of  this 
rider ;  and  submitted  to  the  Bishop  on  all  the 
other  three  points  which  the  Bishop  had  specified ; 
and,  further,  continued  this  course  for  sixteen 
months — that  is  to  say,  until  the  Bishop  sent  him 
a  contradictory  letter,  when  he  felt  unable  to 
obey  any  longer. 

On  Mr.  Enraght's  compliance,  the  Bishop  wrote 
to  Perkins,  in  the  hope  that  the  latter  would  stop 
the  prosecution.  Perkins,  however,  after  taking 
counsel  with  the  "  Church  Association "  and  Mr. 
Jeune,  replied  that  he  would  do  nothing  of  the 
kind.  He  would,  he  said,  have  lost  his  money  if 
he  had.  The  fact  was,  that  the  late  Vicar  of  Aston 
had  sold  the  presentation  of  the  living  to  the 
Aston  Trustees  without  knowing  to  whom  he  was 
selling  it.  And  the  prosecution  of  Mr.  Enraght 
was  not  only  for  the  purpose  of  putting  down 
Eitualism  during  his  incumbency,  but  was  the 
result  of  a  conspiracy  for  getting  into  the  living 
a  clergyman  nominated  by  the  Aston  Trustees. 
"  The  purpose  the  prosecutors  have  in  view," 
wrote  Mr.  C.  B.  Cooper,  "  is  that  the  way  may  be 
made  open — long  before  three  years  have  expired 
— whereby  in  future  sound  Protestant  truth  may 
be  taught  in  the  parish,  which  for  many  years  has 


not  been  the  case."  The  Aston  Trustees  at  this 
time  were  the  Eight  Hon.  Arthur  Fitzgerald ; 
Baron  Kinnaird ;  the  Eev.  Edmund  Hollond,  of 
Benhall  Lodge,  near  Saxmundham,  Suffolk  ;  the 
Eev.  George  Lea,  of  Edgbaston  ;  Sampson  S.  Lloyd, 
Esq.,  of  Moorhall ;  and  the  Eev.  G.  E.  Tate,  of 
Kippington,  near  Sevenoaks,  Kent. 

The  charges  brought  against  Mr.  Enraght  in  the 
representation  were  those  of — 

Unlawful  use  of  lighted  candles. 

Wearing  unlawful  ecclesiastical  vestments  known 
as  the  alb,  the  maniple,  the  chasuble,  and  the 

Unlawfully  mixing  water  with  the  sacramental 
wine  and  administering  the  mixture  to  communi- 
cants at  the  Lord's  Supper. 

Using  wafer-bread  instead  of  bread  as  it  is 
usually  eaten. 

Unlawfully  standing  in  the  middle  of  the  west 
side  of  the  Communion-table,  between  the  people 
and  the  Communion-table,  and  with  his  back 
to  the  people,  so  as  to  hinder  them  seeing 
him  break  the  bread  or  take  the  cup  into  his 

Bowing  and  bending  the  knee,  head,  and  body 
over  the  Communion-table  while  saying  the  Prayer 
of  Consecration,  instead  of  standing  during  the 
whole  time  of  saying  the  said  prayer. 

Unlawfully  making  with  an  appropriate  gesture 
of  his  hand  the  sign  of  the  cross  towards  the  con- 
gregation while  saying  the  Absolution  and  when 
pronouncing  the  final  Benediction. 

Unlawfully  elevating  the  paten,  and  also  the  cup 

TEN   LIES.  465 

which  had  been  placed  on  the  Holy  Table  in  an 
unauthorised  manner. 

Unlawfully  permitting  the  hymn  known  as  the 
Agnus  Dei  to  be  sung. 

Unlawfully  remaining  standing  while  saying  the 
Confession  in  the  Communion-service. 

Unlawfully  kissing  the  Prayer  or  Service-book 
while  officiating  in  the  Communion-service. 

Permitting  processions  of  the  choir  and  acolytes 
with  banners  and  a  cross. 

And,  finally,  unlawfully  placing  a  metal  cross 
on  the  Communion-table  or  on  a  ledge  immediately 
over,  and  appearing  to  be  part  of  such  Communion- 

The  prosecution  evidently  proceeded  upon  the 
plan  of  telling  as  many  lies  as  possible,  knowing 
that  Mr.  Enraght  would  not  appear  to  refute  them. 
In  the  representation  there  were  no  less  than  ten 
such  lies.  Mr.  Enraght  had  disused  altar-lights 
in  deference  to  the  Bishop.  He  had  disused  the 
Eucharistic  vestments.  He  had  ceased  from  mix- 
ing the  chalice.  He  had  never  bowed  the  knee 
while  saying  the  Prayer  of  Consecration.  He  had 
ceased  signing  the  cross  towards  the  congregation 
in  the  Communion-service.  He  had  discontinued 
the  singing  of  the  Agnus  Dei  for  more  than  a  year 
before.  He  had  never  once  kissed  the  Service- 
book.  Of  the  charjre  that  he  had  taken  the  east- 
ward  position  "  with  the  intention  of  preventinsf 
the  people  seeing  "  him  break  the  bread  and  take 
the  cup  into  his  hand,  he  said,  "All  who  know 
me  are  aware  that  I  never  hide  my  ministrations 
from  anyone.  The  charge  was  false  and  ridiculous." 
n.  31 

466  "  FACTS   AND    OFFENCES    PROVED." 

And  as  to  that  charge  according  to  which  he  had 
*'  caused  to  be    formed   a   procession "    "  without 
any   break   or   interval   between  it  and  Morning 
Service,"  "  and  as  connected  with  and  being  the 
beginning  of  and  a  part  of  the  rites  and  ceremonies 
of  pubhc  worship,"  he  said,  "  This  is  absolutely 
untrue."     So  also  as  to  the  cross  :    it  had  been  in 
the  position  whereof  complaint  was  made  for  at 
least   five  years  before  he  became    incumbent   of 
the  church.     And  to  the  shame  of  the  Episcopal 
Bench  it  must  be  stated  that  the  Bishop  of  Wor- 
cester  was    aware    of  most  or  all   of  this    when 
transmitting  the  representation  to  Lord  Penzance. 
The    case  came  before  Lord  Penzance,  sitting  in 
a   room   of  the  House  of  Lords,  on  the    9th   of 
August,  1879.     Mr.  Enraght  did  not  appear,  being 
unable    to    acknowledge    the    pretended    spiritual 
jurisdiction  of  the  court.      Affidavits  were    pro- 
duced as  evidence  in  support  of  the  charges,  lies 
and  all ;    and  then  the  Judge,  declaring  that  the 
facts  and  offences  had  been  very  clearly  proved, 
ordered  a  monition  to  be  issued  against  Mr.  Enraght 
l)idding  him  discontinue  the  practices  specified  in 
the    representation.     Mr.    Enraght   was    also,    of 
course,  condemned  in  the  costs. 

And  now  it  becomes  our  painful  duty  to  chro- 
nicle what,  we  suppose,  will  always  be  known 
among  faithful  members  of  the  Church  of  England 
as  tlie  Bordesley  Sacrilege ;  just  as  the  invitation 
and  admission  of  the  Unitarian  Mi\  Vance  Smith 
to  Communion  in  Westminster  Abbey  by  Dean 
Stanley  is  known  as  the  Westminster  Sacrilege. 
One    day   John   Perkins  went   into  the  vestry  of 


Holy  Trinity  Church,  and  asked  the  Curate  to  show 
him  the  bread  usually  consecrated  in  the  Holy 
Eucharist,  and  administered  to  communicants. 
This  the  Curate  declined  to  do.  Perkins  went  up  for 
Communion  the  same  day,  and  received  the  Sacra- 
ment. Soon  after  another  person  named  Taylor 
went  up  for  Communion,  and  when  the  Lord's 
Body  was  administered  to  him  under  the  form  of 
wafer-bread,  he  secreted  It,  and  afterwards  carried 
It  out  of  the  Church,  and  sent  It  to  those  who 
designated  themselves  the  "  Parish  Committee," 
with  his  name  and  address.  It  came  out  after- 
wards that  the  man  had  committed  the  shocking 
act  under  the  influence  of  a  bribe  in  the  shape  of 
a  suit  of  clothes  and  pair  of  boots.*  The  Holy 
Bread  was  subsequently  sent  up  to  Lord  Penzance's 
Court,  and  was  produced,  on  Mr.  Enraght's  trial, 
in  evidence  against  him. 

The  Low-Church  party  gave  for  some  weeks  no 
more  sig^n  than  Lord  Penzance  had  done  even  of 
bare  disapproval  of  this  sacrilege.  And  the  Bishop 
of  Worcester,  on  appeal  being  made  to  him,  not 
only  declared  that  he  did  not  feel  called  upon 
to  take  any  proceedings  against  the  perpetrator, 
but  also  abstained  from  all  expressions  of  disap- 
proval ;  nor  did  he  intimate  his  own  condemnation 

*  Church  Times,  September  26,  1879.  It  appears  also  from  a 
protest  presented  in  May  1883  by  a  deputation  of  parishioners  of 
Holy  Trinity,  at  a  visitation  held  by  the  Bishop  of  Worcester  in 
St.  Martin's  Vestry,  Birmingham,  for  the  admission  of  church- 
wardens, and  the  drift  of  which  protest  was  against  the  admission 
of  Mr.  Wilham  Adkins,  that  for  the  Bordesley  sacrilege  a  committee 
was  responsible — a]3parently  the  "  Parish  Committee  " — of  which 
this  William  Adkins  was  chairman. 


468  GLORYING    IN    SHAME. 

of  the  act  until  the  11th  of  November  following, 
when  a  large  number  of  the  clergy  and  laity  of  the 
Church  had  expressed  their  feelings  on  the  subject. 
The  first  notice  taken  by  the  "  Church  Association  " 
in  any  of  its  branches,  so  far  as  we  have  been  able 
to  learn,  was  in  the  following  resolution,  passed  l)y 
the  committee  of  a  Birmingham  branch  on  the  3rd 
of  October,  and  communicated  by  their  hon.  secre- 
tary to  the  Church  Times  in  a  letter  well  entitled 
by  the  Editor  of  that  paper,  "  Glorying  in  their 
Shame  :  " — 

"  The  committee  repudiate  the  idea  of  outrage 
and  blasphemy  charged  uj)on  the  act  of  securing 
an  illegal  wafer  for  inspection,  and  regard  it  rather 
as  one  of  loyalty  to  the  Church  and  patriotism  to 
the  State.  They  rejoice  in  it  and  its  results.  To 
detect  imposition,  to  submit  to  the  examination 
and  judgment  of  a  'minister  of  God,'  Lord  Penzance 
(see  Eom.  xiii.  and  xiv.),  is  no  more  iuipious  and 
wrong  than  are  the  unchallenged  doings  of  a  de- 
tective police.  They  also  rejoice  in  the  fact  of  the 
Bishop  having  defended  '  tlie  honour  of  his  Divine 
Master '  before  l^eing  moved  thereto  by  the  memo- 
rialists, and  in  having  himself  first  corrected  '  and 
then  assisted  others  to  punish  the  disobedient  and 
criminous'  Vicar  of  Bordesley.  His  dignified  re- 
fusal of  the  request  of  the  memorialists  redounds 
to  his  honour.  May  his  Lordship  ever  be  Divinely 
directed !  "  * 

We  may  remark  here,  by  tlie  way,  that  in  the 
October  of  the  following  year  the  Bordesley  sacri- 
lege was  copied  in  a  church  at  Chorley,  near  Man- 

*  Church  Times,  October  10,  1879,  p.  628. 


Chester.     The  offender,  however,  was  brought  up 
before  a  magistrate  and  fined. 

We  have  said  that  that  committee  by  which  the 
resolution  just  quoted  was  passed  was  the  com- 
mittee of  a  branch  of  the  "  Church  Association." 
The  Secretary  had  designated  it  "  the  Committee 
of  the  Birmingham  Working-Mens  Branch."  That, 
however,  appears  to  have  been  a  misnomer;  for 
the  president  was  a  clergyman,  the  vice-presidents 
were  ten  clergymen,  one  physician,  and  eleven 
others  to  whose  names  the  designation  "  Esquire  " 
was  appended.*  The  Hon.  Colin  Lindsay  Wood, 
President  of  the  English  Church  Union,  proposed 
to  the  parent  Association  that  it  should  join  with 
the  Union  in  an  indignant  protest  against  the  act 
of  sacrilege ;  but  after  considering  the  matter  for 
some  three  weeks,  the  Council  replied  that  they 
were  entirely  ignorant  of  the  proceedings  of  Taylor 
until  after  the  legal  proceedings  had  terminated, 
and  did  not  therefore  feel  responsible  for  those 
proceedings.f  This  was  all :  no  word  of  indigna- 
tion, not  a  syllable  of  bare  disapproval. 

The  holy  and  Divine  Food  remained  "  filed  as  an 
exhibit "  in  the  registry  of  Lord  Penzance's  court, 
until,  after  a  long  agitation,  it  was  placed  in  the 
hands  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  by  request 
of  the  proctors  for  the  prosecution.  The  Archbishop 
thereupon  carried  it  to  his  private  chapel  and  there 
reverently  consumed  it.  The  "  Church  Association," 
at  a  meeting  of  council  held  in  December,  passed 
a  resolution  that  to  purloin  the  Sacrament  for  the 

*  Letter  in  Church  Times,  October  17,  1879. 
t  Church  Times,  October  24,  1879. 


purposes  of  a  lawsuit  would  he  an  act  of  which 
they  strongly  disapproved;  not,  however,  until  by 
a  lar^e  majority  they  had  passed  a  clause  exone- 
rating Perkins  from  all  blame.  That  worthy  had 
written  to  the  Bishop  of  Worcester  that  he  did  not 
consider  a  wafer  to  be  bread  at  all — that  is,  any 
part  of  a  Sacrament. 

On  the  28th  of  February,  1880,  Lord  Penzance 
sitting  in  his  private  room  at  the  House  of  Lords, 
application  was  made  on  behalf  of  Mr.  Enraght's 
prosecutor  for  an  inhibition  against  Mr.  Enraght 
for  not  obeying  the  orders  of  the  court  as  pre- 
viously given.  The  inhibition  was  accordingly 
issued,  to  last  for  the  space  of  three  months,  or 
until  he  undertook  to  pay  due  respect  to  the  moni- 
tion ;  and  Mr.  Enraght  was  condemned  in  the  costs 
of  the  application. 

Months,  however,  passed  away  without  any  re- 
gard being  paid  by  the  Vicar  of  Holy  Trinity  to 
Lord  Penzance's  decrees.  On  the  5th  of  August 
Lord  Penzance  had  before  him  the  three  cases  of 
Perkins  v.  Enraght,  Sergeant  v.  Dale,  and  Dean  v. 
Green;  and  commented  very  strongly  upon  the 
irregular  conduct  of  the  prosecution  in  each.  He 
could  not  understand,  he  said,  why  for  three 
months  and  more  the  prosecution  had  shown  no 
desire  to  go  on  with  these  cases,  though  the  defen- 
dants were  defying  the  inhibition  every  Sunday  ; 
and  why  now,  all  of  a  sudden,  the  prosecution 
pressed  the  cases  on  with  such  haste  that  the  gravest 
irregularities  had  occurred  in  the  affidavits,  and  in 
the  notices  to  the   defendants  to  appear  in  their 


several  cases.*  Even  this,  however,  failed,  appa- 
rently, to  effect  conformity  to  the  Judge's  wishes. 
It  was  not  till  the  20tli  of  October  that,  an  applica- 
tion having  apparently  been  made  that  Mr,  Enraght 
might  be  signified  in  contempt.  Lord  Penzance  was 
called  upon  to  decide  whether  or  not  to  grant  the 
application.  The  noble  Lord  adjourned  the  case,  on 
the  ground  that  he  wished  to  see  what  effect  the 
fact  of  Mr.  Dale's  being  "  signified "  would  have 
upon  Mr.  Enraght's  conduct.  But  on  the  20th  of 
November,  application  being  made  for  sentence 
in  the  cases  of  Messrs.  Enraght  and  Green,  and 
witnesses  having  sworn  (among  other  things)  to 
having  served  certain  notices  (though  one  of  those 
same  witnesses  subsequently  admitted  that  he  had 
sworn  falsely),  Lord  Penzance  pronounced  both 
defendants  contumacious  and  in  contempt  for 
having  continued  to  oflSciate  in  spite  of  previous 
sentences  ;  and  he  ordered  that  the  matter  be  sig- 
nified to  her  Majesty  in  Chancery,  and  that  the 
defendants  should  pay  the  costs.  And  a  week 
afterwards  (November  27)  Mr.  Enraght  was  ar- 
rested in  consequence,  and  carried  off  to  War- 
wick Gaol,  amidst  the  cheering  of  a  multitude 
of  sympathising  parishioners  and  other  friends. 
The  court  subsequently  allowed  bail,  on  condition 
of  Mr.  Enraght's  complying  with  the  terms  of  the 
inhibition  ;  but  this  he  refused. 

Previously,  however, — that  is,  on  the  2nd  of 
November, — the  Bishop  had  written  to  Mr.  Enraght 
ordering  him  to  cease  from  the  following  practices, 

*  Church  Times,  August  6,  1880. 


over  and  above  the  four  which  he  had  ah-eady 
prohibited,  and  which  Mr.  Enraght  had  discon- 
tinued : — The  use  of  wafer-bread,  the  eastward 
position,  change  of  posture  in  the  course  of  the 
Prayer  of  Consecration,  elevation  of  the  paten  and 
chalice,  the  singing  Agnus  Dei  immediately  after 
the  Consecration,  standing  at  the  Confession  in  the 
Communion-service,  and  kissing  the  Prayer-book. 
Mr.  Enraght  in  reply  (November  9)  asked  the  Bishop 
why  he  took  this  new  course,  violating  the  pre- 
viously implied  understanding  between  them,  and 
why  he  took  it  only  a  few  days  before  the  threat- 
ened imprisonment.  The  Bishop  answered  that 
he  wanted  to  induce  Lord  Penzance  to  be  lenient. 

Meanwhile, — that  is,  on  the  29th  of  November, — 
seven  persons,  including  the  man  Taylor,  who  had 
committed  the  sacrilege  with  respect  to  the  Blessed 
Sacrament,  another  person  of  the  same  surname, 
William  Adkins,  William  Nightingale,  John  Newey, 
and  one  named  Jackson,  these  being  headed  by 
John  Perkins,  and  terming  themselves  parishioners 
and  members  of  the  congregation  of  Holy  Trinity, 
Bordesley,  informed  the  Bishop  that  the  Eev.  War- 
wick Elwin,  Curate  of  Holy  Trinity,  had  done  ten 
acts  which  they  termed  illegal,  and  asked  that  Mr. 
Elwin  might  be  prevented  from  officiating.  Under 
the  circumstances,  however,  the  Bishop  declined 
to  comply  with  their  request. 

While  Mr.  Enraght  was  in  prison  the  English 
Church  Union  took  steps  to  quash  the  proceedings 
which  had  been  taken  against  him,  by  applying  to 
the  Queen's  Bench  Division  of  the  High  Court  of 
Justice  for  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus.     In  this  they 


were  not  successful ;  but  ou  the  case  being  taken 
to  the  Court  of  Appeal,  that  court,  consisting  of 
the  Lord  Chancellor  (the  Earl  of  Selborne)  and 
Lords  Justices  Baggallay  and  Brett,  ordered  Mr. 
Enraght's  release,  on  the  ground  of  a  technical 
informality  in  the  writ  of  his  committal ;  and  Mr. 
Enraght  was  set  at  liberty  accordingly  on  the 
17 til  of  January,  1881.  On  his  arrival  at  Bor- 
desley  he  was  met  at  the  railway-station  by  a  large 
number  of  parishioners  and  other  friends  and  sym- 
pathisers, who  cheered  him  vigorously,  and  in  the 
evening  the  parochial  school-room  was  crowded 
with  persons  who  had  assembled  to  welcome  him 

The  prosecutor,  by  the  advice  of  the  "  Church 
Association,"  at  once  endeavoured  to  get  Mr. 
Enraght  committed  to  gaol  again,  and  with  this 
view  application  was  made  before  Lord  Penzance, 
sittino;  at  the  House  of  Lords  on  the  26th  of 
March,  for  a  fresh  writ  of  signijicavit  to  declare 
Mr.  Enraght  in  contempt.  The  English  Church 
Union,  however,  lodged  at  the  House  of  Lords  a 
petition  of  appeal  against  the  judgment  of  Lord 
Penzance's  court,  in  consequence  of  which  Lord 
Penzance  adjourned  the  hearing,  but  received  for- 
mal evidence  in  support  of  the  charge  of  continued 
disobedience  to  his  Lordship's  inhibition.* 

This  faithful  priest  and  brave  champion  of  the 
Church's  rights  was  not,  however,  to  continue  the 
pastor  of  the  flock  at  Bordesley.  Early  in  No- 
vember 1882  the  Bishop  informed  the  patrons 
of  the  benefice  that,  inasmuch  as  three  years  had 

*    Church  Times,  April  1,  1881. 


elapsed  since  the  date  of  the  monition  against  Mr. 
Enraght,  which  monition  he  had  refused  to  obey, 
the  benefice  was  now  vacant,  and  the  patrons,  after 
some  difficulty,  we  believe,  in  finding  a  clergyman 
to  undertake  the    intrusion,    presented   the   Eev. 
Alan   Hunter  Watts,   of  the   London   College  of 
Divinity,  and  Curate  of  Bishop  Wearmouth  ;  who 
thereupon   received    from    the   Bishop    what  was 
called  institution,  and  read  himself  in  upon  Pas- 
sion Sunday,  March  11, 1883  ;  taking  the  opportu- 
nity to  violate  the  rubrics  of  the  Prayer-book  in 
several  very  plain  and  unquestioned  points.     Mr. 
Enraght,  on  the  other  hand,  on  being  informed  by 
the  Bishop  what  his  Lordship  had  done,  protested 
against  the  act  as  uncanonical  and  of  no  spiritual 
validity ;  but  added  that  if  his  Lordship  should 
think  proper  to  cancel  or  withdraw  that  licence 
to  cure  of  souls  which  he  had  formerly  given,  he, 
Mr.  Enraght,  would  not  refuse  to  submit,  and  on 
the   8th  of  March,   three  days  before  Mr.  Watts 
read  himself  in,   came   to  Mr.   Enraght  a  formal 
document  revoking  his  licence,  and  inhibiting  him 
from  performing   any  service  of  the   Church,  or 
otherwise  exercising  the  cure  of  souls  within  the 
parish  of  Holy  Trinity,  Bordesley  ;  and  it  was  signed 
by  that  same  right  reverend  Father  in  God  who- 
had  in  1874  thus  gratuitously  expressed  himself: 
"  I  have  much  pleasure  in  welcoming  you  to  the 
Diocese    of  Worcester."      Mr.    Enraght  kept  hi& 
word   and  left  the  parish,  and  the  triumph  of  the 
"  Church  Association  "  was  complete.     At  a  meet- 
ing in  1879  of  the  Birmingham  branch,  the  Eev. 
G.  Lea  in  the  chair,  a  resolution  had  been  passed 

MR.   JAMES   BATEMAN.  475- 

expressing  deep  tliankfulness  for  Mr.  Enraglit's 
conviction ;  and  we  can  imagine  the  p^ans  which. 
must  have  resounded  now  that  their  object  was 
fully  gained,  and  another  name  added  to  the  hst 
of  Eitualistic  clergy  who  had  left  their  parishes 
owins  to  the  action  of  the  "  Church  Association." 


Immoral  Period,  contimied.  The  "  Chm-cli  Association "  at  a 
Stand-still.  Further  Intolerance.  Euffianism  at  West  Worling- 
ton.  Eiotous  Proceedmgs  at  St.  Jude's,  Liverpool.  Attack  on 
the  Eev.  N.  Y.  Birkmyre.  Bishop  Piers  Claughton  joins  the 
"  Chm-ch  Association."  A  Word  for  the  Eitnalists  from  Bishop 
Oxenden.     Attacks  on  the  Rev.  G.  C.  Ommaney. 

We  must  now  come  back  to  the  narration  of 
events  which  took  place  in  1880.  In  that  year 
a  large  pamphlet  came  from  the  pen  of  James 
Bateman,  Esq.,  M.A.,  F.E.S.,  on  The  Church  Asso- 
ciation :  its  Policy  and  Prospects.  Lamenting  that 
the  object  for  wdiich  the  "  Church  Association  " 
had  been  originally  formed  had  been  very  imper- 
fectly achieved,  he  mentioned,  among  the  causes 
of  this,  "  the  lukewarmness  and  half-heartedness 
of  a  considerable  number  of  the  EvangeHcal  Clergy 
(better  known  as  the  '  Neos ')  who  have,"  he 
said,  "  shown  a  most  reprehensible  readiness  to 
walk  in  the  ways  of  Sacerdotalism."  In  the 
same  year  an  attempt  was  made  by  the  same 
gentleman  to  get  the  "  Church  Association  "  re- 
organised, with  a  view  to  greater  efficiency  for 
the   promotion   of  its   ends.      And,    indeed,    the 

476  THE    PERSECUTORS    IN    A    POOR    WAY. 

Association  was  in  some  respects  not  progressing 
at  all.  In  January  1879  an  attempt  had  been 
made  to  form  a  branch  at  Plymouth,  and  had 
failed,  only  about  half  a  dozen  persons  having 
attended  what  was  to  have  been  the  preliminary 
meetino;.  The  Vicar  of  Plymouth  had  withdrawn 
from  the  Association  altogether,  and  his  example 
had  been  followed  by  most  of  his  clerical  brethren 
in  the  neighbourhood — those,  that  is,  who  had 
been  members.  In  the  month  of  June,  too,  the 
tenth  and  final  call  had  been  made  for  making  up 
the  Guarantee  Fund  (that  is,  the  fund  to  be  used 
specially  in  persecution)  to  £50,000,  and  it  had 
been  requested  that  payment  might  be  made  be- 
fore the  1st  of  July  next  ensuing.  We  do  not 
know  whether  these  were  the  circumstances  which 
called  forth  the  following  burst  of  oratory,  at  a 
spring  conference  of  the  Association,  from  that 
same  Mr.  Wainwright  whose  lecture  given  at 
Wolverhampton  in  1878  had  the  effect  of  making 
the  Vicar  of  Wolverhampton  withdraw,  as  we 
noted  before  : — "  As  he  [Mr.  Wainwright]  had 
listened  to  that  discussion  there  was  a  throbbing 
undertone  in  his  mind,  and  it  now  took  the  form 
of  the  question,  What  were  they  going  to  do  ?  " 
&c.,  &c. 

Yet  the  spirit  of  the  Association  was  strong  and 
uncompromising  as  ever.  At  the  spring  meeting 
in  1880  a  Mr.  Lovell.said  that  he  knew  no  reason 
why  a  Eitualistic  clergyman  should  not  be  dealt 
with  in  the  same  way  as  a  pickpocket,  and  prose- 
cuted under  a  certain  Act  of  Elizabeth ;  so  that 
for  breach  of  a  rubric  (he  meant,  for  breach  of 


Privy  Council  falsifications  of  the  rubrics)  he  might 
be  sentenced,  for  the  first  offence,  to  forfeit  a  year's 
profit  of  his  benefice  and  be  imprisoned  for  six 
months ;  for  a  second  offence,  be  deprived  and 
imprisoned  for  a  year ;  and  for  a  third  offence,  be 
imprisoned  for  life.*  Nor  was  Low-Church  in- 
tolerance confined  to  the  "  Church  Association."  In 
this  same  year  the  Eichmond  Board  of  Guardians 
objected  to  adorning  of  the  altar-cloth  in  the  work- 
house chapel  with  the  sacred  monogram,  and  to 
putting  up  texts  of  Scripture  on  the  walls,  these 
beins  considered  as  tendino-  to  Eitualism.  And 
in  the  following  year  the  same  Board  refused  per- 
mission for  hanging  up  in  one  of  the  wards  a 
picture  of  the  Crucifixion,  given  to  an  inmate  of 
the  union  by  a  friend.  The  picture  had  a  verse  of 
a  hymn  and  some  other  sentences  roughly  illu- 
minated round  it.  In  November  the  Eev.  Charles 
Walker  Molony,  Eector  of  West  Worhngton,  in  the 
north  of  Devon,  wrote  to  the  Church  Times  f  an 
account  of  the  rufiianism  to  which  he  and  his 
family  had  been  subjected  because  of  his  having 
endeavoured  to  stop  the  beU-ringing  which  had 
been  customary  in  what  was  called  Eevel  Week, 
when  there  was  much  drunkenness  even  on  the 
part  of  some  of  the  ringers.  Mr.  Molony's  fowls 
were  stolen  and  killed  ;  his  wife  and  daughter  had 
large  stones  thrown  at  them ;  his  coach-house, 
stables,  and  cow-house  set  on  fire,  and  a  fine  cow 
burnt  to  death.  And  he  received  a  letter  in  which 
the  writer  said :  "  If  you  are  one  of  those  traitors 

*  Church  Times,  May  21,  1880. 
t  lb.  November  25,  1881,  p.  802. 

478  ABUSE    OF    MR.    WRAY. 

who,  professing  to  be  a  Protestant  clergyman  [sic], 
are  trying  to  introduce  Popery  [&c.  &c.],  then  all 
honour  to  the  demonstrators  !  " 

At  Liverpool  also  there  were  proceedings  of  a 
most  disgraceful  character.  Liverpool,  from  its 
proximity  to  L'eland,  and  from  being  withal  a 
principal  seaport,  was  naturally  the  chief  strong- 
hold of  that  party  of  Irishmen  in  England  which 
has  always  been  peculiarly  rabid  in  its  Protes- 
tantism. In  the  year  1836  the  Eev.  Cecil  Wray 
had  been  appointed  to  the  Incumbency  of  St. 
Martin's-in-the-Pields  in  that  town,  and  had  com- 
menced daily  Mattins  and  Evensong,  and  a  celebra- 
tion of  the  Eucharist  on  every  Sunday  and  festival, 
and  had  continued  this  until  his  resignation  in 
1875.  And  for  this,  and  although  his  ritual  went 
no  further  than  putting  his  choir  into  surplices, 
and,  we  suppose,  wearing  the  surphce  in  the  pul- 
pit himself,  yet  he  was  abused  and  vilified  by  his 
Low-Church  neighbours  to  a  greater  degree  for 
these  things  than  when,  on  the  written  request  of 
his  congregation,  he  adopted  the  Eucharistic  vest- 
ments and  other  matters  of  Catholic  ritual.  He 
was  denounced  from  platforms  and  in  the  Press  as 
a  traitor  and  a  Jesuit,  and  every  foul  name  in  the 
fertile  vocabulary  of  the  Orange  faction  was  hurled 
at  him.*  That  was  the  time  when  ecclesiastical 
affixirs  in  Liverpool  were   ruled  by  Dr.   M'Neile, 

*  Mr.  Macaulay  (afterwards  Lord  Macaixlay)  used  the  following 
language,  February  19,  1844,  in  his  speech  on  the  state  of  Ireland  : 
"  It  was  pleasant  to  hear  your  opponents  called  by  every  nickname 
that  is  to  be  found  in  the  foul  vocabulary  of  the  Keverend  Hugh 
M'Neile." — Miscellaneous  Writings  and  Speeches,  new  edition, 
London,  1871,  p.  G49. 

MOBBING    OF   MR.    FITZROY.  479 

afterwards  the  "  great  and  good  "  Dean  of  Eipon, 
and  what  was  termed  the  Irish  Brigade.* 

In  this  Orange-ridden  town  the  Eev.  Ernest 
James  Augustus  Fitzroy  had  been  appointed  to  the 
vicarage  of  St.  James's,  Hardwick  Street,  in  1879  ; 
and  soon  gave  offence  to  his  Low-Church  neigh- 
bours by  improving  the  services  of  his  church. 
On  Sunday,  the  6th  of  August,  1882,  there  were 
scenes  of  disorder  insi